Radiocarbon chronology of Iron Age Jerusalem reveals calibration offsets and architectural developments
Open accessAbstract
Reconstructing the absolute chronology of Jerusalem during the time it served as the Judahite Kingdom’s capital is challenging due to its dense, still inhabited urban nature and the plateau shape of the radiocarbon calibration curve during part of this period. We present 103 radiocarbon dates from reliable archaeological contexts in five excavation areas of Iron Age Jerusalem, which tie between archaeology and biblical history. We exploit Jerusalem’s rich past, including textual evidence and vast archaeological remains, to overcome difficult problems in radiocarbon dating, including establishing a detailed chronology within the long-calibrated ranges of the Hallstatt Plateau and recognizing short-lived regional offsets in atmospheric 14 C concentrations. The key to resolving these problems is to apply stringent field methodologies using microarchaeological methods, leading to densely radiocarbon-dated stratigraphic sequences. Using these sequences, we identify regional offsets in atmospheric 14 C concentrations c. 720 BC, and in the historically secure stratigraphic horizon of the Babylonian destruction in 586 BC. The latter is verified by 100 single-ring measurements between 624 to 572 BC. This application of intense 14 C dating sheds light on the reconstruction of Jerusalem in the Iron Age. It provides evidence for settlement in the 12th to 10th centuries BC and that westward expansion had already begun by the 9th century BC, with extensive architectural projects undertaken throughout the city in this period. This was followed by significant damage and rejuvenation of the city subsequent to the mid-eight century BC earthquake, after which the city was heavily fortified and continued to flourish until the Babylonian destruction.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
A dense radiocarbon program of 103 archaeological samples plus 100 single tree rings produced a decadal-resolution Iron Age chronology for Jerusalem despite the Hallstatt Plateau, and identified two offsets from IntCal20 at c. 730–710 BC and c. 586 BC. The chronology reconstructs urban expansion, earthquake damage, fortification, and Building 100’s ~300-year use, anchored by the mid-8th-century BC earthquake and the 586 BC Babylonian destruction.
Key findings
- Wiggle matching of 103 archaeological 14C measurements and 100 single tree rings achieved decadal resolution within the Hallstatt Plateau. In Area U Room 17063, Floor 11 gave a combined 2545 ± 11 14C BP, c. 760 BC; Floors 10–6 dated 730–705 BC; Floors 5–3 dated 710–670 BC; Floor 2 dated 690–670 BC.
- Two offsets from IntCal20 were identified: a 14C enrichment c. 730–710 BC, with samples lying below the curve (Sycamore 1 inner measurement 2396 ± 31 uncal BP), and a 14C depletion c. 586 BC, where 14 of 15 samples lay above the curve. The 15-sample combined age was 2530 ± 6 uncal BP; short-lived samples alone gave 2520 ± 7 uncal BP, 40 to 24 14C years above the curve center for 586–590 BC, and after reducing the Egypt offset the combined date was 2510 ± 7 uncal BP, still 14 to 21 y above.
- Urban history: 18 dates (~20% of samples) fell in the 12th–10th centuries BC; Building 100 construction was constrained to 900–850 BC, its first renovation to 790–760 BC, and its second story to 680–670 BC or 610–590 BC, assigned by the authors to c. 680–670 BC; the building was destroyed in 586 BC after ~300 y of use. The mid-8th-century BC earthquake combined date was 2507 ± 8 uncal BP, with the earliest probability range 766–750 BC considered most likely.
- Pottery types diagnostic of terminal Iron Age phases, such as rosette stamped handles, stepped-rim and folded-rim holemouth jars, stump-base lamps, flat platters with out-turned rim, and bag-shaped storage jars, appeared only above the uppermost floor of Room 17063, from c. 650 BC onward; early late-Iron Age types appeared with Floors 9–11 dated 780–715 BC.
Methods
- The study dated 103 archaeological samples, mostly single charred items and seeds, from three excavation areas on the Southeastern Ridge, plus 100 single tree rings from Irish oak and Bristlecone pine. Contexts were characterized with microarchaeological methods, including Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy.
- Charred remains were pretreated by acid–base–acid; bone collagen was extracted with ABA followed by gelatinization and ultrafiltration; graphitization used an EA-AGE3 system; 14C was measured at the DANGOOR Research Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Laboratory.
- Radiocarbon ages were calibrated and modeled with OxCal version 4.4.2 using IntCal20, generally reporting the 68.3% probability range; wiggle matching and Bayesian outlier modeling were used for sequences.
Limitations
- The paper states that the 586 BC offset’s 14 to 21 y difference from the calibration curve is within measurement error, although nine of ten short-lived samples fell clearly above the curve; the authors lean toward a regional or site-specific offset. It also states that a future more-resolved calibration curve will not shift enough to cancel the observed 590–586 BC offset.
- The paper states that Room 17063 is rather small, so a larger-scale, pottery-rich excavation is needed to serve as a broader scaffold for southern Levant Iron Age pottery; it calls the ceramic dating a first step.
- Evident from the text: the chronology depends on historical pegs—the 586 BC Babylonian destruction and the mid-8th-century BC earthquake—and on textual/stratigraphic correlations; early Iron Age contexts often lacked diagnostic ceramics; and in Area 70-south, two of three OSL dates were older than the radiocarbon dates with non-overlapping ranges.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
5 of 41 cited sources checked · 2 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
- Findingown data
In this study, several offsets were identified, in which dated samples from contexts with known expected ages securely dated by independent historic and stratigraphic records provided 14C measurements either above or below what might be predicted based on IntCal20.
“In this study, we identified several offsets, in which dated samples from contexts with known expected ages securely dated by independent historic and stratigraphic records, provided 14C measurements either above or below what might be predicted for these dates based on the existing calibration curve, IntCal20 (9) (Fig. 6).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites [9] P. J. Reimer, The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0–55 cal kBP). Radiocarbon 55, 1869– 1887 (2020). source
- Interpretationcitation
The lengthy period of use of Building 100, determined from radiocarbon dates, may be emblematic of the city's long-term economic flourishing and relative political stability up until the Babylonian invasion at the beginning of the 6th century BC.
“The lengthy period of use of Building 100, determined from our radiocarbon dates, may be emblematic of the city’s long-term economic flourishing and relative political stability (62, 63) up until the Babylonian invasion at the beginning of the 6th century BC.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites [62] A. Amir, Residue analysis evidence for wine enriched with vanilla consumed in Jerusalem on the eve of the Babylonian destruction in 586 BCE. PLoS One 17, e0266085 (2022). 35349581 PMC8963535 source
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites [63] R. Avisar, Y. Shalev, H. Shochat, Y. Gadot, I. Koch, Jerusalem ivories. Atiqot 106, 57– 74 (2022).
Not checked in the free run.
- Findingown data
Room 17063 in Area U yielded 14C concentrations closely tracking the fluctuations (wiggles) over much of the calibration curve within the Hallstatt Plateau.
“This effort yielded 14C concentrations closely tracking the fluctuations (wiggles) over much of the calibration curve within the Hallstatt Plateau.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
We identified two regional radiocarbon offsets during the Iron Age period.
“Using a combination of these improved approaches in terms of both archaeological sampling and radiocarbon calibration, we overcame the archaeological complexity of Jerusalem, refined the radiocarbon Hallstatt Plateau, and identified two regional radiocarbon offsets during the Iron Age period.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Radiocarbon measurements from Floors 10-7 in Room 17063 of Area U and two samples from Building 100 (Sycamore 1 RTD10683 and wall plaster RTD9346) lie beneath the calibration curve.
“The radiocarbon measurements from Floors 10–7 in Room 17063 of Area U (Fig. 6, elongated ellipses), and those of two samples from Building 100 (Area 10)—one from a beam (Sycamore 1, RTD10683) and another from a wall plaster (RTD9346, Figs. 5F and 6, black squares; SI Appendix, Fig. S29), lie beneath the calibration curve.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingown data
By wiggle matching against the calibration curve, a decadal resolution, not usually possible during the problematic 300-y-long Hallstatt plateau, was achieved.
“By wiggle matching against the calibration curve, a decadal resolution, not usually possible during the problematic 300-y-long Hallstatt plateau, was achieved.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The 14C calibration-curve resolution in the segment of the Hallstatt Plateau critical to Jerusalem's chronology was improved by dating an additional 100 single tree rings from Irish oak and Bristlecone pine.
“We also dated an additional 100 single tree rings from Irish oak and Bristlecone pine, improving the 14C calibration-curve resolution in the segment of the Hallstatt Plateau critical to this part of Jerusalem’s chronology.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Samples from Floors 10-6 are relatively enriched in 14C compared to the expected values of the calibration curve, forming an offset from the curve.
“These samples are relatively enriched in 14C compared to the expected values of the calibration curve, forming an offset from the curve (see below).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The three subsequent occupation phases (Floors 5-3) form a sequence within the years 710 to 670 BC.
“The three subsequent occupation phases (Floors 5–3, Fig. 2, orange and yellow samples), with decreasing radiocarbon amounts, form a sequence within the years 710 to 670 BC.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation
The pottery found in association with Building 100 belongs almost entirely to the end of the 7th to the early 6th centuries BC, in the terminal Iron Age.
“the pottery found in association with the building belongs almost entirely to the end of the 7th to the early 6th centuries BC, in the terminal Iron Age (for a similar assemblage, see ref. 35).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Radiocarbon determinations demonstrate a ~300-y use of Building 100.
“Remarkably, while our radiocarbon determinations demonstrate a ~300-y use of Building 100 (Fig. 5), the pottery found in association with the building belongs almost entirely to the end of the 7th to the early 6th centuries BC, in the terminal Iron Age”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In Area E, a white-sediment floor of Shiloh's Stratum 12 yielded four older dates.
“Also, in Area E, a white-sediment floor of Shiloh’s Stratum 12 (generally assigned to the 8th century BC) yielded four older dates.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The OSL dates are older than the radiocarbon dates in two out of three compared dates, to the extent that the ranges of the two methods do not overlap.
“Interestingly, in two out of the three compared dates, the OSL dates are older, to the extent that the ranges of the two methods do not overlap (SI Appendix, Figs. S39 and S41).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation
Building 100 was finally toppled by the massive conflagration of 586 BC, as dated using pottery found on the building's destruction deposit floor.
“The building was finally toppled by the massive conflagration of 586 BC, as dated using pottery found on the building’s destruction deposit floor (31–33, 61).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked- cites [31] O. Lipschitz, The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: Judah under Babylonian Rule (Eisenbrauns, 2005).
- cites [32] N. Shalom, Destruction by fire: Reconstructing the evidence of the 586 BCE Babylonian destruction in a monumental building in Jerusalem. J. Archaeol. Sci. 157, 105823 (2023).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites [33] N. Shalom, The Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem as a symbol? New archaeological evidence of the Babylonian conquest. Hebrew Bible Ancient Israel 12, 85– 107 (2023).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites [61] O. Lipschits, Age of Empires: The History and Administration of Judah in the 8th–2nd Centuries BCE in Light of the Storage-Jar Stamp Impressions (Penn State Press, 2021).
- Findingown data
The topmost floor (Floor 1) was constructed around the mid-7th century BC.
“Another date from the same floor (Floor 1) falls at the bottom of the same wiggle, around 660 BC, anchoring the time when the floor was constructed to around the mid-7th century BC.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Pottery types of important diagnostic value broadly assigned to the Iron Age terminal phases were only found above the uppermost floor of Room 17063.
“We observe that pottery types of important diagnostic value, broadly assigned to the Iron Age terminal phases (54), such as rosette stamped handles, stepped-rim and folded-rim holemouth jars, stump-base lamps, flat platters with an out-turned rim, and bag-shaped storage jars, were only found above the uppermost floor of Room 17063.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In Iron Age Jerusalem, 103 14C measurements on samples from a range of contexts were used to reconstruct Jerusalem's urban history.
“In Iron Age Jerusalem, 103 14C measurements on samples from a range of contexts were used to reconstruct Jerusalem’s urban history.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The outermost rings of two other F. sycomorus beams (RTD10652, 10752) and one Ceratonia siliqua beam (RTD10653) date either a decade before or after the wiggle-matched radiocarbon peak of Sycamore 1.
“The outermost rings of two other charred F. sycomorus beams (RTD10652, 10752) and one Ceratonia siliqua beam (RTD10653) date either a decade before or after the wiggle-matched radiocarbon peak of Sycamore 1.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The first major renovation of Building 100 was dated 790 to 760 BC.
“Another Phase 10/IX was dated 790 to 760 BC and was attributed to the first major renovation of Building 100.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation
The whole Building 100 was destroyed by fire on the historically secured date of 586 BC.
“The whole building was destroyed by fire on the historically secured date of 586 BC (see below) (32).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [32] N. Shalom, Destruction by fire: Reconstructing the evidence of the 586 BCE Babylonian destruction in a monumental building in Jerusalem. J. Archaeol. Sci. 157, 105823 (2023).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
The deepest in situ surface in Room 17063 (Floor 11) was independently dated with four separate samples to a combined date of 2545 ± 11 14C BP.
“The deepest in situ surface in Room 17063 (Floor 11), a firepit on the orange clay used to level the underlying bedrock—was independently dated with four separate samples to reach high precision (providing a combined date of 2545 ± 11 14C BP.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation
A similar effect to the 730-710 BC enrichment was identified at around 2830 BC at the tell sites of Megiddo and Bet Yerah.
“A similar effect was identified at around 2830 BC at the tell sites of Megiddo and Bet Yerah (SI Appendix, S4 and Fig. S48).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation
The 730-710 BC offset results are consistent with some of the IntCal20 raw data for this time period, specifically those reported by Fahrni et al., which also lie below the curve during the time interval in question.
“It is noteworthy that these results are consistent with some of the IntCal20 raw data for this time period (specifically those reported by Fahrni et al., 10), which also lie below the curve during the time interval in question.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Fahrni et al., 10
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Findingown data
In Area U, long-term use is documented by the radiocarbon dates for several bedrock floors and the uppermost white-sediment floor of Room 17063.
“Similarly, in Area U, long-term use is documented by the radiocarbon dates for several bedrock floors and the uppermost white-sediment floor of Room 17063 (see above).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
Ongoing development of the city is documented between the 8th and the 6th centuries BC, until the destruction in 586 BC.
“Ongoing development of the city is documented between the 8th and the 6th centuries BC, until the destruction in 586 BC.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The combined date of the short-lived samples is 40 to 24 14C years above the center of the calibration curve for the years 586 to 590 BC.
“The latter is 40 to 24 14C years above the center of the calibration curve for the years 586 to 590 BC.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The archaeological data better fit the annually resolved measurement series assembled for this study than the current IntCal20 calibration curve for the timespan in question.
“Our archaeological data better fit the annually resolved measurement series we assembled for this study than the current IntCal20 calibration curve for the timespan in question.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingnone given
These 12th to 10th century BC contexts were often lacking diagnostic ceramics.
“However, these contexts were often lacking diagnostic ceramics.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Large wiggles and plateaus in the 14C calibration curve, such as the Hallstatt Plateau during 770~420 BC, mean that radiocarbon samples from the Iron Age period produce multiple dating solutions and very wide calibrated ranges.
“Besides the archaeological difficulties, large wiggles and plateaus in the 14C calibration curve (e.g., the “Hallstatt Plateau” during 770~420 BC) mean that radiocarbon samples from the Iron Age period produce multiple dating solutions and very wide calibrated ranges (5).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [5] G. Hervé, P. Lanos, Improvements in archaeomagnetic dating in Western Europe from the Late Bronze to the Late Iron Ages: An alternative to the problem of the Hallstattian Radiocarbon Plateau. Archaeometry 60, 870– 883 (2018). source
- Interpretationown data
This outcome demonstrates the potential to obtain a high-precision radiocarbon chronology within a relatively flat section of the calibration curve.
“This outcome demonstrates the potential to obtain a high-precision radiocarbon chronology within a relatively flat section of the calibration curve.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Radiocarbon determinations from various building materials and floors provide a more realistic approximation of the chronology of the analyzed structures and the history of occupation of buildings and entire settlements than do pottery and other remains of material culture.
“Thus, the radiocarbon determinations from various building materials and floors provide a more realistic approximation of the chronology of the analyzed structures and the history of occupation of buildings and entire settlements, than does the pottery and other remains of material culture.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
These results suggest a higher influx of radiocarbon around 730 to 710 BC than predicted by the calibration curve.
“These results suggest a higher influx of radiocarbon around 730 to 710 BC than predicted by the calibration curve.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The abundance of early Iron Age dates, measured from all areas in the study, indicates widespread occupation of yet undetermined character in Jerusalem during the 12th to 10th centuries BC.
“The abundance of early Iron Age dates, measured from all the areas in our study, clearly indicates widespread occupation of yet undetermined character, often underestimated due to the limited architectural contexts attributed to this period.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The mid-8th century BC earthquake that devastated the city is dated to 766 to 750 BC.
“Of these, we consider the earliest probability distribution of 766 to 750 BC as the most likely range.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationnone given
The combined uncalibrated date of 2507 ± 8 uncal BP can be used to identify the same seismic event in other Near Eastern sites.
“The combined uncalibrated date of 2507 ± 8 uncal BP can be used to identify the same seismic event in other Near Eastern sites and to inform the calibrated result within the Hallstatt Plateau.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
A mid-8th century BC earthquake occurred more than 150 y prior to the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem.
“The second crucial chronological peg involves a mid-8th century BC earthquake, occurring more than 150 y prior to the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem (corresponding to Shiloh’s Stratum 12b, SI Appendix, Table S1).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked- cites [37] J. Uziel, O. Chalaf, “ Archaeological evidence of an earthquake in the capital of Judah” in City of David Studies of Ancient Jerusalem 16, E. Meiron, Ed. (Megalim Institute, City of David, 2021), pp. 41– 55.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites [38] S. A. Austin, G. W. Franz, E. G. Frost, Amos’s earthquake: An extraordinary Middle East seismic event of 750 B.C. Int. Geol. Rev. 42, 657– 671 (2010). source
- cites [39] A. Agnon, “ Pre-instrumental earthquakes along the Dead Sea Rift” in Dead Sea Transform Fault System: Reviews (Springer, 2014), pp. 207– 261.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites [40] S. K. Raphael, A. Agnon, “ Earthquakes east and west of the Dead Sea transform in the Bronze and Iron Age” in Tell it in Gath—Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel; Essays in Honor of Aren M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday (Zaphon, 2018), pp. 769– 798.
Not checked in the free run.
- Interpretationreasoning
Where contexts are dated historically with certainty, these dates can be used effectively to better tease apart possible global/regional/seasonal/subannual effects on the radiocarbon budget.
“Furthermore, this study highlights that where contexts are dated historically with certainty, as for the examples in this study, these dates can then be used effectively to better tease apart possible global/regional/seasonal/subannual effects on the radiocarbon budget.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The study is able to describe Jerusalem's building history over c. 500 y of the Iron Age with sub-decadal detail and fidelity.
“Thus, we are able to describe Jerusalem’s building history over c. 500 y of the Iron Age with sub-decadal detail and fidelity:”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductnone given
The study assessed the validity and accuracy of its dating framework by employing two widely known historical events as chronological pegs: the mid-8th century BC earthquake and the 586 BC Babylonian destruction.
“Here, we assessed the validity and accuracy of our dating framework by employing two widely known historical events that broadly impacted Iron Age Jerusalem as chronological pegs: the mid-8th century BC earthquake and the 586 BC Babylonian destruction.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The mid-8th century BC earthquake broadly impacted Iron Age Jerusalem and can serve as a chronological peg.
- Premisecitation
The Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem occurred in 586 BC.
“the destruction of Jerusalem in the historically secured date of 586 BC”
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · plain
“the 586 BC Babylonian destruction”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites [31] O. Lipschitz, The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: Judah under Babylonian Rule (Eisenbrauns, 2005).
- cites [33] N. Shalom, The Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem as a symbol? New archaeological evidence of the Babylonian conquest. Hebrew Bible Ancient Israel 12, 85– 107 (2023).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · plain
- Interpretationreasoning
A future more-resolved calibration curve will not be shifted to the extent that can cancel out the observed offset in 590 to 586 BC.
“Still, we note that a future more-resolved calibration curve will not be shifted to the extent that can cancel out the observed offset in 590 to 586 BC.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The offset identified at 586 BC relates to some real site or regionally specific effect.
“Therefore, the offset we identified relates to some real site or regionally specific effect.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Using the 586 BC historical event, the study detected a part of the global calibration curve where improved resolution will contribute to the ability to identify and account for regional offsets.
“Using the 586 BC historical event, we detected a part of the global calibration curve where improved resolution will contribute to our ability to identify and account for regional offsets.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
King Uzziah's reign spanned the mid-8th century BC.
“latter years of King Uzziah, whose reign spanned the mid-8th century BC”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [49] F. Vukosavović, O. Chalaf, J. Uziel, “ And you counted the houses of Jerusalem and pulled houses down to fortify the wall” (Isaiah 22:10): The fortifications of Iron Age II Jerusalem in light of new discoveries in the City of David” in New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region: Collected Papers, Y. Zelinger, O. Peleg-Barkat, J. Uziel, Y. Gadot, Eds. (Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem, 2021), vol. 1, p. 16. source
- May combine two claims. 33
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 6
May combine two claims.
InterpretationcitationThe beams were supports of a massive floor of polished plaster, built in a second renovation stage as the second story of Building 100.
“The beams are understood to have been the supports of a massive floor of polished plaster, built in a second renovation stage as the second story of Building 100 (36).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites [36] Y. Vaknin, The Earth’s magnetic field in Jerusalem during the Babylonian destruction: A unique reference for field behavior and an anchor for archaeomagnetic dating. PLoS One 15, e0237029 (2020). 32764793 PMC7413505 source
The Introduction’s archaeological context section describes massive charred beams that may have supported a thick, smooth, polished floor on the second story of Structure 100; the Discussion reinforces that interpretation. Our copy does not say the floor was built during a second renovation stage or explicitly identify its material as plaster. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationDee et al. found an offset with a 14C depletion of 19 ± 5 y in Egypt due to a shift in the regional growing season (winter/spring) compared to that of the trees of higher latitudes used for assembling the calibration curve (spring/summer); it was later reduced to 12.5 y when comparing AMS measurements with segments in the calibration curve that were also measured by AMS.
“Dee et al. (18) found an offset with a 14C depletion of 19 ± 5 y in Egypt due to a shift in the regional growing season (winter/spring) compared to that of the trees of higher latitudes used for assembling the calibration curve (spring/summer). It was later reduced to 12.5 y when comparing AMS measurements with segments in the calibration curve that were also measured by AMS (64, 65).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked- cites [18] M. W. Dee, Investigating the likelihood of a reservoir offset in the radiocarbon record for ancient Egypt. J. Archaeol. Sci. 37, 687– 693 (2010). source
- cites [64] N. Brehm, Eleven-year solar cycles over the last millennium revealed by radiocarbon in tree rings. Nat. Geosci. 14, 10– 15 (2021). source
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured - cites [65] F. Höflmayer, S. W. Manning, A synchronized early Middle Bronze Age chronology for Egypt, the Levant, and Mesopotamia. J. Near East Stud. 81, 1– 24 (2022). source
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductcitationAll samples for radiocarbon dating were collected in the field for chronology-building purposes, combined with microarchaeological analyses of sediments as part of context in situ verification.
“All the samples for radiocarbon dating were collected in the field for chronology-building purposes, combined with microarchaeological analyses of sediments as part of context in situ verification (15, 16, 22, 23, 66, 67).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked- cites [15] J. Regev, I. Finkelstein, M. J. Adams, E. Boaretto, Wiggle-matched 14C chronology of Early Bronze Megiddo and the synchronization of Egyptian and Levantine chronologies. Egypt the Levant 24, 241– 264 (2014). source
- cites [16] J. Regev, S. Paz, R. Greenberg, E. Boaretto, Radiocarbon chronology of the EB I-II and II–III transitions at Tel Bet Yerah, and its implications for the nature of social change in the southern Levant. Levant 51, 54– 75 (2019). source
- cites [22] J. Regev, Radiocarbon dating and microarchaeology untangle the history of Jerusalem’s Temple Mount: A view from Wilson’s Arch. PLoS One 15, e0233307 (2020). 32492032 PMC7269203 source
May combine two claims.
Findingown dataThese dates are all from contexts clearly predating the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC, and yet the calibrated measurements obtained postdate the destruction.
“These dates are all from contexts clearly predating the destruction of Jerusalem in the historically secured date of 586 BC and yet, the calibrated measurements obtained postdate the destruction.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
FindingreasoningThe 730-710 BC offset and the 2830 BC offset occur below sharp minimum peaks of the calibration curve.
“The fact that this offset and the one at 2830 BC occur below sharp minimum peaks of the calibration curve indicates that caution should be exercised when calibrating measurements that fall within such zones.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataFloors 10-6 in Room 17063 represent the next phase of occupation, with dates of 730 to 705 BC.
“Floors 10–6 (c. 30 cm thick; Fig. 2, purple and red samples) represent the next phase of occupation in Room 17063, with dates of 730 to 705 BC.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe most probable felling time for the Sycamore 1 beam from Room A of Building 100 was 680 to 670 BC or 610 to 590 BC.
“The most probable felling time for this beam was determined at 680 to 670 BC or 610 to 590 BC.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataOut of the 15 measured samples from the 586 BC destruction contexts, only one coincides with the calibration curve (RTD10755), while the remaining 14 samples lie above it.
“Nevertheless, out of the 15 measured samples, only one coincides with the calibration curve (RTD10755), while the remaining 14 samples lie above it.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataResults revealed excursions in 14C concentration that were outside the ranges of the calibration curve, verified by a set of 100 calendar-dated tree rings.
“Results also revealed excursions in 14C concentration that were outside the ranges of the calibration curve, verified by a set of 100 calendar-dated tree rings.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe 15 samples' combined radiocarbon age is 2530 ± 6 uncal BP, whereas the one of only the short-lived samples is 2520 ± 7 uncal BP.
“The 15 samples’ combined radiocarbon age is 2530 ± 6 uncal BP, whereas the one of only the short-lived samples is 2520 ± 7 uncal BP (see SI Appendix, Table S3 for R_Combine details).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe calibrated date of Floor 11 corresponds to c. 760 BC, slightly earlier than the beginning of the Hallstatt Plateau.
“The calibrated date corresponds to c. 760 BC, a date slightly earlier than the beginning of the Hallstatt Plateau, constraining the beginning of the overlying archaeological sequence before the plateau timespan.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe five dates retrieved from Sycamore 1 along its radius demonstrate a rapid decrease in the measured radiocarbon amount, with the earliest determination from the inner part of the beam indicating an enriched radiocarbon content, measuring 2396 ± 31 uncal BP.
“The five dates retrieved from Sycamore 1, along its radius, demonstrate a rapid decrease in the measured radiocarbon amount, with the earliest determination, from the inner part of the beam, indicating an enriched radiocarbon content, measuring 2396 ± 31 uncal BP.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe study provides concrete evidence for a widespread human presence in the city during the 12th to 10th centuries BC, as short-lived material from all the areas studied was dated to these centuries.
“We provide concrete evidence for a widespread human presence in the city during the 12th to 10th centuries BC, as short-lived material from all the areas studied was dated to these centuries.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe study succeeded in reaching decadal precision and identified two regional offsets from the global calibration curve during the Iron Age, c. 730 to 710 BC and 586 BC.
“With this approach, instead of calibrated ranges spanning 300 y, we succeeded in reaching decadal precision and identified two regional offsets from the global calibration curve during the Iron Age, c. 730 to 710 BC and 586 BC, with potentially far-reaching implications for future 14C applications”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe annually resolved series of 100 measurements of individual growth rings of Irish oak and Bristlecone pine indicates that some regions of the calibration curve at 624 to 590 BC may need to be shifted higher in the graph (a position with less 14C), but this up-shift is not evident in the relevant 590 to 586 BC curve segment.
“Our annually resolved series indicates that some regions of the calibration curve at 624 to 590 BC may need to be shifted higher in the graph (a position with less 14C), but this up-shift is not evident in the relevant 590 to 586 BC curve segment (Fig. 6, Inset).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataMajor changes in the city's urban plan were shown to follow the devastating earthquake of c. 760 BC, including the building of a Mid-Slope Fortification and a retaining wall along the eastern slope of the Southeastern Ridge, which are attributed to the time of King Uzziah rather than King Hezekiah.
“Major changes in the city’s urban plan were shown to follow the devastating earthquake of c. 760 BC, including the building of a Mid-Slope Fortification and a retaining wall along the eastern slope of the Southeastern Ridge, which are attributed by us to the time of King Uzziah rather than the more conventional assignment to that of King”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe city's westward spread out of its ancient core is assigned to at least as early as the 9th century BC, as attested by the radiocarbon dating of the construction of monumental Building 100 in excavation Area 10 (GPL) and the large-scale terracing activities of the bedrock done prior to its construction.
“The city’s westward spread out of its ancient core is assigned here to at least as early as the 9th century BC, as attested by the radiocarbon dating of the construction of monumental Building 100 in excavation Area 10 (GPL) and the large-scale terracing activities of the bedrock done prior to its construction.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
FindingreasoningReducing the proposed 19 y Egypt offset from the remaining five samples (pea, wheat, barley, and linen; fall/winter/spring growing season) and combining them with the olives and the grape pip results in a date of 2510 ± 7 uncal BP, still above the calibration curve by 14 to 21 y.
“Reducing the proposed 19 y Egypt offset from the remaining five samples (pea, wheat, barley, and linen; fall/winter/spring growing season) and combining them with the olives and the grape pip results in a date of 2510 ± 7 uncal BP, still above the calibration curve by 14 to 21 y.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
FindingreasoningAmong the 10 dated short-lived samples from the 586 BC destruction contexts, four are olive pits and one a grape pip, which grow in the spring/summer and hence are not expected to record an offset such as the one recorded in Egypt.
“In the present case, among the 10 dated short-lived samples, four are olive pits and one a grape pip (see SI Appendix, Table S3 for the samples’ growth seasons), which grow in the spring/summer and, hence, are not expected to record an offset such as the one recorded in Egypt.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
PremisecitationRadiocarbon dating was rarely applied for the Iron Age period in Jerusalem, and chronological frameworks were based solely on pottery typology, stratigraphy, and integration of textual sources.
“Surprisingly, though, radiocarbon dating was rarely applied for this period in Jerusalem (1–3), and the chronological frameworks were based solely on pottery typology, stratigraphy, and integration of textual sources.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites [1] A. Frumkin, A. Shimron, J. Rosenbaum, Radiometric dating of the Siloam Tunnel, Jerusalem. Nature 425, 169– 171 (2003). 12968177 source
- cites [2] E. Mazar, Preliminary Report on the City of David Excavations 2005: At the Visitors Center Area (Shalem Press, 2007).
Not checked in the free run.
- cites [3] E. Mazar, The Palace of King David: Excavations at the Summit of the City of David; Preliminary Report of the Seasons 2005–2007 (Shoham Academic Research and Publication, 2009).
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationcitationThe construction of the second story of Building 100 is assigned to c. 680 to 670 BC, during the long reign of King Manasseh, rather than 610 to 590 BC.
“Drawing on historical considerations, we assign the construction of the second story to c. 680 to 670 BC, during the long reign of King Manasseh (60) rather than 610 to 590 BC, 10 y before the historical date for the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [60] Y. Gadot, “ Jerusalem, the reign of Manasseh and the Assyrian world order” in F. Hagemeyer, Ed. Jerusalem and the Coastal Plain in the Iron Age and Persian Periods: New Studies on Jerusalem's Relations with the Southern Coastal Plain of Israel/Palestine (c. 1200–300 BCE) (Orientalische Religionen in der Antike, 2022), vol. 46, pp. 145– 161, (Research on Israel and Aram in Biblical Times; No. 4).
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningThese pottery types occur in the sequence from c. 650 BC onward, indicating that the part of the sequence below the uppermost floor ended in the early 7th century BC.
“As these types occur in our sequence from c. 650 BC onward, they serve as evidence that the part of the sequence below the uppermost floor ended in the early 7th century BC, supporting the conclusion based on wiggle matching of the radiocarbon dates.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
PremisereasoningThe Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC is a historically sound event that can be relied upon.
“all indicate that the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC, which determined the end of the Judahite Monarchy and the Iron Age in the southern Levant, is a historically sound event that can be relied upon.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked- cites [30] P.-A. Beaulieu, A History of Babylon, 2200 BC-AD 75 (John Wiley & Sons, 2018).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites [31] O. Lipschitz, The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: Judah under Babylonian Rule (Eisenbrauns, 2005).
- cites [32] N. Shalom, Destruction by fire: Reconstructing the evidence of the 586 BCE Babylonian destruction in a monumental building in Jerusalem. J. Archaeol. Sci. 157, 105823 (2023).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites [33] N. Shalom, The Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem as a symbol? New archaeological evidence of the Babylonian conquest. Hebrew Bible Ancient Israel 12, 85– 107 (2023).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningThe city's continuous occupation indicates a time of demographic growth while recurring conflicts with regional empires negatively affected settlements elsewhere in the region.
“The city’s continuous occupation indicates a time of demographic growth while recurring conflicts with regional empires negatively affected settlements elsewhere in the region.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningThese well-prepared, long-used floors were continually kept clean while in use so that most of the material accumulated on top of them originates from the final phase of occupation and the collapse of wall material from the structures.
“These observations suggest that these well-prepared, long-used floors were continually kept clean while in use so that most of the material accumulated on top of them originates from the final phase of occupation and the collapse of wall material from the structures.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataThe major building project of Jerusalem's 8th-century BC fortifications, previously assigned to King Hezekiah, can now be associated with the latter years of King Uzziah, suggesting the city was fortified during the Syro-Ephraimite war.
“Therefore, while the major building project of Jerusalem’s 8th-century BC fortifications was previously assigned to King Hezekiah in the late 8th century BC (e.g., ref. 59) based on our chronology, these activities can now be associated with the latter years of King Uzziah, whose reign spanned the mid-8th century BC, suggesting the city was fortified during the Syro-Ephraimite war (2nd Kings 15 to”
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · boosted
“Major changes in the city’s urban plan were shown to follow the devastating earthquake of c. 760 BC, including the building of a Mid-Slope Fortification and a retaining wall along the eastern slope of the Southeastern Ridge, which are attributed by us to the time of King Uzziah rather than the more conventional assignment to that of King”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [49] F. Vukosavović, O. Chalaf, J. Uziel, “ And you counted the houses of Jerusalem and pulled houses down to fortify the wall” (Isaiah 22:10): The fortifications of Iron Age II Jerusalem in light of new discoveries in the City of David” in New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region: Collected Papers, Y. Zelinger, O. Peleg-Barkat, J. Uziel, Y. Gadot, Eds. (Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem, 2021), vol. 1, p. 16. source
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · boosted
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataThe city expanded westward in the 9th century BC, and possibly earlier.
“The following dates reinforce the suggestion that the city expanded westward in the 9th century BC, and possibly earlier (48, 58): the secure date of the bat context; the assemblage of earlier dates from within the walls; and the accumulation above the terraced bedrock, which was intentionally quarried as part of large-scale terracing of the slope undertaken before Building 100.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).
InterpretationreasoningThe field and lab approach could well be applicable to dating other urban contexts.
“This field and lab approach could well be applicable to dating other urban contexts.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataA new fortification along the eastern slope of the Southeastern Ridge was erected after the mid-8th century BC earthquake, and the blocking of the entrance to Room 17063 at 730 to 710 BC coincided with its erection.
“Our dating of a construction used to block the entrance to Room 17063 at 730 to 710 BC (Floor 10, RTD9128, Fig. 2, purple sample) suggests that this activity postdates the earthquake and coincided with the erection of the new fortification line.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimClassified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
PremisecitationMost short-lived seeds from the 586 BC destruction contexts were expected to be between 590 to 586 BC, slightly prior to the destruction event since the siege began two and a half years before the destruction occurred.
“We expected most of the short-lived seeds from these contexts to be between 590 to 586 BC, slightly prior to the destruction event since the siege began two and a half years before the destruction occurred. (2nd Kings, Ch. 25) (31, 33).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites [31] O. Lipschitz, The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: Judah under Babylonian Rule (Eisenbrauns, 2005).
- cites [33] N. Shalom, The Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem as a symbol? New archaeological evidence of the Babylonian conquest. Hebrew Bible Ancient Israel 12, 85– 107 (2023).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataAlthough the 14 to 21 y difference between the combined date from 10 samples and the calibration curve is within the measurement error, with nine out of the 10 short-lived samples falling clearly above the curve, the authors lean toward the possibility that they represent a regional or site-specific radiocarbon offset, not represented by the Irish oak and the Bristlecone pine, even though the后者树生长
“Although the 14 to 21 y-difference between our combined date from 10 samples and the calibration curve is within the measurement error, with nine out of the 10 short-lived samples falling clearly above the curve, we lean toward the possibility that they represent a regional or site-specific radiocarbon offset, not represented by the Irish oak and the Bristlecone pine, even though the latter tree”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Study design and conductown dataSeveral reasons eliminate a laboratory bias explanation for the two types of offset observed: two opposite offsets each with very consistent measurements; samples measured in our laboratory over several years giving consistent results; and the 2830 BC offset has the same character as the 730 to 710 BC one and includes samples measured at another laboratory.
“Several reasons eliminate a laboratory bias explanation for the two types of offset observed. First, we found two opposite offsets, each with very consistent measurements. Second, the samples were measured in our laboratory over a period of several years, giving consistent results; and third, the 2830 BC offset has the same character as the 730 to 710 BC one and includes samples measured at”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
PremisecitationKing Manasseh's reign was long and covered c. 680 to 670 BC.
“during the long reign of King Manasseh (60)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [60] Y. Gadot, “ Jerusalem, the reign of Manasseh and the Assyrian world order” in F. Hagemeyer, Ed. Jerusalem and the Coastal Plain in the Iron Age and Persian Periods: New Studies on Jerusalem's Relations with the Southern Coastal Plain of Israel/Palestine (c. 1200–300 BCE) (Orientalische Religionen in der Antike, 2022), vol. 46, pp. 145– 161, (Research on Israel and Aram in Biblical Times; No. 4).
Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe Syro-Ephraimite war occurred and is described in 2nd Kings 15 to 16.
“suggesting the city was fortified during the Syro-Ephraimite war (2nd Kings 15 to 16) (49).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites 2nd Kings 15 to 16
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites [49] F. Vukosavović, O. Chalaf, J. Uziel, “ And you counted the houses of Jerusalem and pulled houses down to fortify the wall” (Isaiah 22:10): The fortifications of Iron Age II Jerusalem in light of new discoveries in the City of David” in New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and its Region: Collected Papers, Y. Zelinger, O. Peleg-Barkat, J. Uziel, Y. Gadot, Eds. (Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem, 2021), vol. 1, p. 16. source
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationThe Babylonian siege began two and a half years before the destruction of Jerusalem.
“since the siege began two and a half years before the destruction occurred. (2nd Kings, Ch. 25) (31, 33).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites 2nd Kings, Ch. 25
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- cites [31] O. Lipschitz, The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: Judah under Babylonian Rule (Eisenbrauns, 2005).
- cites [33] N. Shalom, The Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem as a symbol? New archaeological evidence of the Babylonian conquest. Hebrew Bible Ancient Israel 12, 85– 107 (2023).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).
InterpretationreasoningRadiocarbon dating on a broad scale should be used to provide a more reliable site history, particularly in a densely rebuilt city, where foundations often reach the bedrock.
“This signifies that radiocarbon dating on a broad scale should be used to provide a more reliable site history, particularly in a densely rebuilt city, where foundations often reach the bedrock.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
Systematic radiocarbon dating has not previously been employed to comprehensively address highly controversial issues in Jerusalem’s early history.
“It is striking that despite the centrality of Iron Age Jerusalem to research on the history of major biblical narratives relating to the ancient Near East and lingering questions about the origins of state societies, systematic radiocarbon dating has not previously been employed to comprehensively address highly controversial and intriguing issues in the city’s early history.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The mid-8th century BC earthquake broadly impacted Iron Age Jerusalem and can serve as a chronological peg.
“Here, we assessed the validity and accuracy of our dating framework by employing two widely known historical events that broadly impacted Iron Age Jerusalem as chronological pegs: the mid-8th century BC earthquake and the 586 BC Babylonian destruction.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
760 BC is within the stated Hallstatt Plateau
MinorThe paper defines the Hallstatt Plateau as spanning 770-420 BC. A date of about 760 BC falls within that interval, not before its beginning.
“The calibrated date corresponds to c. 760 BC, a date slightly earlier than the beginning of the Hallstatt Plateau, constraining the beginning of the overlying archaeological sequence before the plateau timespan.”
“the “Hallstatt Plateau” during 770~420 BC”
Cites
IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0–50,000 years cal BP
Reimer, P. J., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Beck, J. W., Blackwell, P. G., Ramsey, C. B., Buck, C. E., Cheng, H., Edwards, R. L., Friedrich, M., et al. (2013) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.2458/azu_js_rc.55.16947 · Cited by 14,591 · see citing works
Bayesian Analysis of Radiocarbon Dates
Bronk Ramsey, C. (2009) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200033865 · Cited by 8,725 · see citing works
The IntCal20 Northern Hemisphere Radiocarbon Age Calibration Curve (0–55 cal kBP)
Reimer, P. J., Austin, W. E. N., Bard, E., Bayliss, A., Blackwell, P. G., Bronk Ramsey, C., Butzin, M., Cheng, H., Edwards, R. L., Friedrich, M., et al. (2020) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2020.41 · Cited by 7,900 · see citing works
Self-citationDealing with outliers and offsets in radiocarbon dating
Bronk Ramsey, C. (2009) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200034093 · Cited by 1,204 · see citing works
Brock, F., Higham, T., Ditchfield, P. W., & Ramsey, C. B. (2010) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200045069 · Cited by 931 · see citing works
‘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
Weiner, S. (2010) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511811210 · Cited by 376 · see citing works
Berna, F., Behar, A., Shahack-Gross, R., Berg, J., Boaretto, E., Gilboa, A., Sharon, I., Shalev, S., Shilstein, S., Yahalom-Mack, N., et al. (2007) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2006.05.011 · Cited by 290 · see citing works
Self-citationRegev, L., Poduska, K. M., Addadi, L., Weiner, S., & Boaretto, E. (2010) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2010.06.027 · Cited by 233 · see citing works
Self-citationEleven-year solar cycles over the last millennium revealed by radiocarbon in tree rings
Brehm, N., Bayliss, A., Christl, M., Synal, H.-A., Adolphi, F., Beer, J., Kromer, B., Muscheler, R., Solanki, S. K., Usoskin, I., et al. (2021) · Nature Geoscience · doi:10.1038/s41561-020-00674-0 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
Yizhaq, M., Mintz, G., Cohen, I., Khalaily, H., Weiner, S., & Boaretto, E. (2005) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s003382220001969x · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Self-citationAnnual radiocarbon record indicates 16th century BCE date for the Thera eruption
Pearson, C. L., Brewer, P. W., Brown, D., Heaton, T. J., Hodgins, G. W. L., Jull, A. J. T., Lange, T., & Salzer, M. W. (2018) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aar8241 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Self-citationJerusalem in Bible and archaeology: the First Temple period
(2004) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.41-5250 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Relationship between solar activity and Δ<sup>14</sup>C peaks in AD 775, AD 994, and 660 BC
Park, J., Southon, J., Fahrni, S., Creasman, P. P., & Mewaldt, R. (2017) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2017.59 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
(2005) · Cited by 95 · see citing works
High-precision radiocarbon dating and historical biblical archaeology in southern Jordan
Levy, T. E., Higham, T., Ramsey, C. B., Smith, N., Ben‐Yosef, E., Robinson, M. A., Münger, S., Knabb, K. A., Schulze, J. P., Najjar, M., et al. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0804950105 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
EXCAVATIONS IN THE CITY OF DAVID
Reich, R. (2021) · Penn State University Press eBooks · doi:10.5325/j.ctv1w36prd.5 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Fantalkin, A., & Finkelstein, I. (2006) · Tel Aviv · doi:10.1179/tav.2006.2006.1.18 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Na’aman, N. (2007) · Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research · doi:10.1086/basor25067021 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Investigating 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 2× · see citing works
“Dee et al. (18) found an offset with a 14 C depletion of 19 ± 5 y in Egypt due to a shift in the regional growing season (winter/ spring) compared to that of the trees of higher latitudes used for assembling the calibration curve (spring/summer).”
BackgroundDating Materials in Good Archaeological Contexts: The Next Challenge for Radiocarbon Analysis
Boaretto, E. (2009) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200033804 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Self-citationRadiometric dating of the Siloam Tunnel, Jerusalem
Frumkin, A., Shimron, A., & Rosenbaum, J. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01875 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Pre-Instrumental Earthquakes Along the Dead Sea Rift
Agnon, A. (2014) · Modern approaches in solid earth sciences · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-8872-4_8 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Geoarchaeological Investigation in a Domestic Iron Age Quarter, Tel Megiddo, Israel
Regev, L., Cabanes, D., Homsher, R. S., Kleiman, A., Weiner, S., Finkelstein, I., & Shahack-Gross, R. (2015) · Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental research · doi:10.5615/bullamerschoorie.374.0135 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Self-citationManning, S. W., Griggs, C., Lorentzen, B., Bronk Ramsey, C., Chivall, D., Jull, A. J. T., & Lange, T. E. (2018) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1719420115 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Nur, A. M., & Burgess, D. (2008) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9780691236988 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Absolute Dating of the Gihon Spring Fortifications, Jerusalem
Regev, J., Uziel, J., Szanton, N., et al. (2017) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2017.37 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Self-citationHazor, the rediscovery of a great citadel of the Bible
Yadin, Y. (1975) · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Ben-Ami, D. (2013) · doi:10.2307/j.ctt1fzhdtq · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Regev, L., Steier, P., Shachar, Y., Mintz, E., Wild, E. M., Kutschera, W., & Boaretto, E. (2016) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2016.96 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Self-citationHazor, the rediscovery of a great citadel of the Bible
Yadin, Y. (1975) · doi:10.2307/3209360 · Cited by 44
The History of the Gih on Spring in Jerusalem
Reich, R., & Shukron, E. (2004) · Levant · doi:10.1179/lev.2004.36.1.211 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Solar forcing of abrupt climate change around 850 calendar years BC
Geel, B. V., Raspopov, O. M., van der Plicht, J., et al. (1998) · UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Hervé, G., & Lanos, P. (2018) · Archaeometry · doi:10.1111/arcm.12344 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Mediterranean radiocarbon offsets and calendar dates for prehistory
Manning, S. W., Kromer, B., Cremaschi, M., Dee, M. W., Friedrich, R., Griggs, C., & Hadden, C. S. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aaz1096 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Annual Variation in Atmospheric <sup>14</sup>C Between 1700 BC and 1480 BC
Pearson, C., Wacker, L., Bayliss, A., Brown, D., Salzer, M., Brewer, P., Bollhalder, S., Boswijk, G., & Hodgins, G. (2020) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2020.14 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Self-citationNew Evidence on the Location and Nature of Iron Age, Persian and Early Hellenistic Period Jerusalem
Shalev, Y., Shalom, N., Bocher, E., et al. (2020) · Tel Aviv · doi:10.1080/03344355.2020.1707451 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Self-citationBeaulieu, P. (2017) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119257561 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Global Production and Decay of Radiocarbon
Damon, P. E., & Sternberg, R. E. (1989) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/s0033822200012297 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Regev, J., Uziel, J., Lieberman, T., Solomon, A., Gadot, Y., Ben-Ami, D., Regev, L., & Boaretto, E. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0233307 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Self-citationRegev, J., Finkelstein, I., Adams, M. J., & Boaretto, E. (2015) · Ägypten und Levante · doi:10.1553/s241 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationBoaretto, E. (2015) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.2458/azu_rc.57.18554 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Self-citationAmos’s earthquake: An extraordinary Middle East seismic event of 750 B.C
Austin, S. A., Franz, G. W., & Frost, E. G. (2000) · International Geology Review · doi:10.1080/00206810009465104 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Vaknin, Y., Shaar, R., Gadot, Y., Shalev, Y., Lipschits, O., & Ben-Yosef, E. (2020) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0237029 · Cited by 25 · cited 2× · see citing works
“A clear destruction layer containing the typical pottery assemblages of this temporal phase has been comprehensively characterized in different parts of the city (28, 34–36).”
BackgroundSelf-citationFahrni, S. M., Southon, J., Fuller, B. T., Park, J., Friedrich, M., Muscheler, R., Wacker, L., & Taylor, R. E. (2020) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2020.16 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Vukosavović, F., Chalaf, O., & Uziel, J. (2021) · New studies in the archaeology of Jerusalem and its region / חידושים בארכיאולוגיה של ירושלים וסביבותיה · doi:10.2307/j.ctv2175qkc.3 · Cited by 24
Self-citationPreliminary Report on The City of David Excavations 2005 at the Visitors Center Area
Mazar, E., & Gordon, B. (2008) · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Regev, J., Paz, S., Greenberg, R., & Boaretto, E. (2019) · Levant · doi:10.1080/00758914.2020.1727238 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Self-citationPatterns of seismic sequences in the Levant—interpretation of historical seismicity
Salamon, A. (2009) · Journal of Seismology · doi:10.1007/s10950-009-9168-9 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
(2021) · Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Recent Excavations Near the Gihon Spring and Their Reflection on the Character of Iron II Jerusalem
Szanton, J. U. A. N. (2015) · Tel Aviv · doi:10.1179/0334435515z.00000000053 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
A Synchronized Early Middle Bronze Age Chronology for Egypt, the Levant, and Mesopotamia
Höflmayer, F., & Manning, S. W. (2022) · Journal of Near Eastern Studies · doi:10.1086/718498 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Weiner, S., Nagorsky, A., Taxel, I., et al. (2020) · Journal of Archaeological Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102263 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
MIDDLE BRONZE AGE JERUSALEM: RECALCULATING ITS CHARACTER AND CHRONOLOGY
Regev, J., Gadot, Y., Roth, H., Uziel, J., Chalaf, O., Ben-Ami, D., Mintz, E., Regev, L., & Boaretto, E. (2021) · Radiocarbon · doi:10.1017/rdc.2021.21 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Self-citationAmir, A., Finkelstein, I., Shalev, Y., Uziel, J., Chalaf, O., Freud, L., Neumann, R., & Gadot, Y. (2022) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0266085 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Self-citationFantalkin, A., & Finkelstein, I. (2006) · Tel Aviv · doi:10.1179/033443506788991505 · Cited by 8
Sapir‐Hen, L., Uziel, J., & Chalaf, O. (2021) · Near Eastern Archaeology · doi:10.1086/714074 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citationCline, E. H. (2005) · University of Michigan Press eBooks · doi:10.3998/mpub.164087 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Shalom, N., Vaknin, Y., Shaar, R., Ben-Yosef, E., Lipschits, O., Shalev, Y., Gadot, Y., & Boaretto, E. (2023) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2023.105823 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citationJudahite Gath in the Eighth Century B.C.E.: Finds in Area F from the Earthquake to the Assyrians
Chadwick, J. R., & Maeir, A. M. (2018) · Near Eastern Archaeology · doi:10.5615/neareastarch.81.1.0048 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
The Babylonian Destruction of Jerusalem as a Symbol?
Shalom, N. (2023) · Hebrew Bible and Ancient Israel · doi:10.1628/hebai-2023-0007 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Self-citationThe History of Iron Age Jerusalem: A Ceramic Approach
Dan-Goor, S. (2022) · Tel Aviv · doi:10.1080/03344355.2022.2057022 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Judah during the Transition between the Persian and Early Hellenistic Periods: Regional Processes
Lipschits, O. (2024) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110487442-018 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Shalom, N., Vaknin, Y., Shaar, R., et al. (2023) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4441154
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- E. Mazar, The Palace of King David: Excavations at the Summit of the City of David; Preliminary Report of the Seasons 2005–2007 (Shoham Academic Research and Publication, 2009).
- J. Regev , “Insights into the contribution of radiocarbon dating in reconstructing Jerusalem’s past: The Early Bronze Age settlement of Jerusalem” in Centro: Collected Papers, I. Koch, Y. Tepper, S. Dan-Goor, G. Stiebel, Eds. (Time, 2023).
- O. K. Davis J. Jirikowic R. M. Kalin “Radiocarbon record of solar variability and Holocene climatic change” in Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Pacific Climate (PACLIM) Workshop Asilomar California—March 10-13 1991: Climate Variability of the Eastern North Pacific and Western North America K. T. Redmond Ed. (Interagency Ecological Studies Program for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary 1992) p. 19.
- R. Reich, Excavating the City of David: Where Jerusalem’s History Began (Israel Exploration Society, Israel, 2011).
- Y. Shiloh, D. T. Ariel, A. De-Groot, H. Bernick-Greenberg, Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 (Hebrew University Jerusalem, 1984).
- A. De-Groot, H. Bernick-Greenberg, Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh VIIA: Area E: Stratigraphy and Architecture (Qedem 53) (Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Institute of Archaeology, 2012).
- E. Mazar, B. Māzār, Y. Nadelman, Excavations in the south of the Temple Mount: The Ophel of Biblical Jerusalem (Qedem2900) (Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1989), vol. 29.
- S. K. Raphael, A. Agnon, “Earthquakes east and west of the Dead Sea transform in the Bronze and Iron Age” in Tell it in Gath—Studies in the History and Archaeology of Israel; Essays in Honor of Aren M. Maeir on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday (Zaphon, 2018), pp. 769–798.
- H. J. Franken, M. L. Steiner, Excavations in Jerusalem 1961-1967. 2. The Iron Age Extramural Quarter on the South-East Hill (The Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990).
- A. De Groot, H. Bernick-Greenberg, Excavations at the City of David 1978–1985 Directed by Yigal Shiloh VIIB: Area E: The Finds (Qedem 54) (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, The Institute of Archaeology, 2012).
- J. Uziel, S. Dan-Goor, N. Szanton, “Chapter 4. The Development of Pottery in Iron Age Jerusalem” in The Iron Age Pottery of Jerusalem: A Typological and Technological Study, D. Ben-Shlomo , Eds. (Ariel, 2019), pp. 59–102.
- Y. Shalev , “The fortifications along the western slope of the City of David: A new perspective” in New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem and Its Region. Collected Papers, O. Peleg-Barkat , Eds. (Hebrew, Jerusalem, 2019), vol. 12, pp. 51–70.
- Y. Gadot, “Jerusalem, the reign of Manasseh and the Assyrian world order” in F. Hagemeyer, Ed. Jerusalem and the Coastal Plain in the Iron Age and Persian Periods: New Studies on Jerusalem's Relations with the Southern Coastal Plain of Israel/Palestine (c. 1200–300 BCE) (Orientalische Religionen in der Antike, 2022), vol. 46, pp. 145–161, (Research on Israel and Aram in Biblical Times; No. 4).
- R. Avisar, Y. Shalev, H. Shochat, Y. Gadot, I. Koch, Jerusalem ivories. Atiqot 106, 57–74 (2022).
- 10.1017/CBO9780511811210 · DOI
Cited by
Still being checked.
- Authors
- Regev, J., Gadot, Y., Uziel, J., Chalaf, O., Shalev, Y., Roth, H., Shalom, N., Szanton, N., Bocher, E., Pearson, C. L., Brown, D. M., Mintz, E., Regev, L., & Boaretto, E.
- Affiliations
- Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
- Tel Aviv University (IL)
- Israel Antiquities Authority (IL)
- Bar-Ilan University (IL)
- University of Arizona (US)
- Queen's University Belfast (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Boaretto, Elisabetta
- ORCID
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2024-04-29
- Volume
- 121
- Issue
- 19
- Pages
- e2321024121-e2321024121
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- PMC
- PMC11087761
- OpenAlex
- W4396241887
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 65
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 5.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Israel Science Foundation (2485/22)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient and Medieval Archaeology Studies
- Keywords
- radiocarbon chronology, urban settlement, city walls, biblical archaeology, microarchaeology, stratigraphic sequence
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.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-26.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-26.
Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.
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
