The Minoan Thera eruption predates Pharaoh Ahmose: Radiocarbon dating of Egyptian 17th to early 18th Dynasty museum objects

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].”

• cites [70] G Bonani, 2001, Radiocarbon Dates of Old and Middle Kingdom Monuments in Egypt, Radiocarbon sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction (page not provided) says radiocarbon dates often lacked close agreement with historical chronology, and the sample-collection section describes dating organic material from mudbricks. The passages do not establish that the dates were more often older by decades or centuries, and they do not mention mud seals. (LLM, conf=0.79)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [71] MW Dee, 2009, Reanalysis of the Chronological Discrepancies Obtained by the Old and Middle Kingdom Monuments Project, Radiocarbon sourcePartly supported

  The Introduction says the original radiocarbon dates tended to be older than historical dates, sometimes with calibrated ranges extending back 300–400 years. It also says grasses and twigs were sampled from mud bricks, but most samples were charcoal from mortar; it does not report mud-seal samples or establish that the stated offsets occurred specifically in mud-brick material. The Results and Discussion further report that the reanalysis brought estimated monument completion dates much closer to historical records. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [97] MW Dee, 2012, Antiquity sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Calibrating GrA-64347 using OxCal and IntCal20 gives an age range 1542-1427 cal BCE (66.4%) with highest probability.

“Using OxCal [72,90] with IntCal20 [59], the age range 1542–1427 cal BCE (66.4%) has the highest probability, visually shown by the tallest peaks of the calibrated age graph (Fig 8).”

• cites [72] C Bronk Ramsey, 2009, Bayesian Analysis of Radiocarbon Dates, Radiocarbon sourceSupported
• cites [90] Bronk Ramsey C. OxCal radiocarbon calibration program. Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Oxford University. Available from: https://c14.arch.ox.ac.uk/oxcal.htmlNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [59] PJ Reimer, 2020, The IntCal20 northern hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0–55 cal kBP), Radiocarbon sourceSupported

Calibrating DRI-2948 using OxCal with IntCal20 yields a 95.4% probability date of 1881-1626 cal BCE.

“We calibrated this result, using OxCal [72,90] with the latest calibration curve IntCal20 [59], yielding a 95.4% probability date of 1881–1626 cal BCE.”

• cites [72] C Bronk Ramsey, 2009, Bayesian Analysis of Radiocarbon Dates, Radiocarbon sourceSupported
• cites [90] Bronk Ramsey C. OxCal radiocarbon calibration program. Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, Oxford University. Available from: https://c14.arch.ox.ac.uk/oxcal.htmlNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [59] PJ Reimer, 2020, The IntCal20 northern hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0–55 cal kBP), Radiocarbon sourceSupported

The δ13C values of the six shabtis match quite well with δ13C data of ancient Ficus sycomorus samples from Egypt, −27.6‰ and −25.7‰.

“These values seem to match quite well with δ13C data of ancient Ficus sycomorus samples from Egypt, −27.6 ‰ and −25.7 ‰, measured at the Oxford laboratory [171].”

• cites [171] C Bronk Ramsey, 2015, Archaeometry sourcePartly supported

  The Egypt Abydos, Sedment and others datelist reports δ13C values of −27.6‰ and −25.7‰ for the cited wooden samples. It identifies the −25.7‰ sample as Ficus sycomorus, but marks the −27.6‰ sample as “Ficus sycomorus?”, so the claim omits that identification uncertainty. The comparison with the shabtis is the citing authors’ own assessment. (LLM, conf=0.85)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Tamarix and Acacia have δ13C values that are less negative than the shabtis.

“However, both of these trees have δ13C values that are less negative. For example, the few Tamarix trees growing today at Mount Sedom near the Dead Sea in Israel, a hyper-arid region with 46 mm average annual rainfall (1960–2005), have δ13C values ranging from −21.1 ‰ to −22.7 ‰. Tree rings of ancient Tamarix wood uncovered at Mount Sedom have δ13C values in the range of −25.8 ‰ to −20.6 ‰, as wet”

• cites [171] C Bronk Ramsey, 2015, Archaeometry sourceCould not verify

  The Egypt Abydos, Sedment and other sites passage (listed under “Iraq Kish”; page unavailable) gives δ13C values for Acacia wooden combs. Searches for Tamarix and shabtis found no measurements for either or a comparison with the Acacia samples, so our copy does not establish that the trees’ values are less negative than the shabtis’. (LLM, conf=0.76)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [172] A Frumkin, 2009, Stable isotopes of a subfossil Tamarixtree from the Dead Sea region, Israel, and their implications for the Intermediate Bronze Age environmental crisis, Quat res sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The 13 uncalibrated radiocarbon dates from Akrotiri charred seeds range from 3400 ± 31 BP (OxA-11820) to 3315 ± 31 BP (VERA-2757).

“The 13 individual dates have a range from 3400 ± 31 BP (OxA-11820) to 3315 ± 31 BP (VERA-2757).”

• cites [57] C Bronk Ramsey, 2004, Dating the Volcanic Eruption at Thera, Radiocarbon sourcePartly supported

  Appendix I and the Bayesian model list OxA-11820 as 3400 ± 31 BP, and the measurements section identifies the Akrotiri volcanic-destruction samples as charred seeds. But the paper lists 16 measurements in its Thera destruction-layer series, including values outside the claimed range, and the searched passages do not identify VERA-2757 or its asserted 3315 ± 31 BP date. It therefore does not support the stated range for 13 dates. (LLM, conf=0.87)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [191] SW Manning, 2006, Chronology for the Aegean Late Bronze Age 1700–1400 B.C, Science sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

There does not seem to be a measurable volcanic CO2 reservoir effect in the vegetation growing on Thera (Santorini).

“Hence, there does not seem to be a measurable volcanic CO2 reservoir effect in the vegetation growing on Thera (Santorini), as also noted by Manning [60] and Pearson et al. [68].”

• cites [60] SW Manning, 2022, Second Intermediate Period date for the Thera (Santorini) eruption and historical implications, PLoS One sourcePartly supported

  In “Volcanic CO2 and resolving this issue for the Thera case” (page unavailable), Manning says no volcanic CO2 effect is evident in the Thera VDL radiocarbon samples. “Resolving the question of a volcanic CO2 effect on the Thera VDL samples” limits the conclusion to no substantive effect on those samples; the paper also mentions effects in plants close to an emission source on Thera. It does not establish the claim for vegetation growing on Thera generally. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [68] C Pearson, 2023, Olive shrub buried on Therasia supports a mid-16th century BCE date for the Thera eruption, Sci Rep sourcePartly supported

  The Results (Radiocarbon dating; no page given) say the olive and comparison samples show no major volcanic radiocarbon offset on Thera in the years leading up to the eruption, consistent with no substantial effect from old volcanic CO2. The citing sentence extends that finding to vegetation growing on Thera generally and to any measurable effect; the source does not rule out smaller effects or address other periods. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

The individual 14C dates of Palaikastro range from 3390 ± 35 BP (GrA-30339) to 3310 ± 35 BP (GrA-30336).

“The individual 14C dates of Palaikastro range from 3390 ± 35 BP (GrA-30339) to 3310 ± 35 BP (GrA-30336)”

• cites [8] HJ Bruins, 2008, Geoarchaeological tsunami deposits at Palaikastro (Crete) and the Late Minoan IA eruption of Santorini, Journal of Archaeological Science sourceCould not verify

  The available indexed passages, labeled Abstract (no page number), identify the Palaikastro paper and list radiocarbon dating as a keyword, but give no individual dates. Searches for GrA-30339, 3390 BP, and 3310 BP found no passage stating the claimed range or sample IDs. (LLM, conf=0.76)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [9] HJ Bruins, 2009, The Minoan Santorini Eruption and Tsunami Deposits in Palaikastro (Crete): Dating by Geology, Archaeology, 14C, and Egyptian Chronology, Radiocarbon sourcePartly supported

  Table 2 (Introduction) gives 3390 ± 35 BP for GrA-30339 and 3310 ± 35 BP for GrA-30336; these bound the five bone dates. But the table also lists a Palaikastro marine-shell date of 3790 ± 60 BP, so the stated range does not cover all individual ¹⁴C dates without a bone-sample qualifier. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [194] HJ Bruins, 2014, The Thera olive branch, Akrotiri (Thera) and Palaikastro (Crete): comparing radiocarbon results of the Santorini eruption, Antiquity sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

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.”

• cites [70] G Bonani, 2001, Radiocarbon Dates of Old and Middle Kingdom Monuments in Egypt, Radiocarbon sourcePartly supported

  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 [97] MW Dee, 2012, Antiquity sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The epidermis layer of the plant fragment shows small silicified cell bodies (phytoliths), ca 10 micron in size, which appear to have conical shapes, typical for sedge plants (Cyperaceae family).

“The epidermis layer shows small silicified cell bodies (phytoliths), ca 10 micron in size, which appear to have conical shapes, typical for sedge plants (Cyperaceae family) [143–146].”

• cites [143] AM Rosen, 1996, Phytoliths in the Predynastic: a microbotanical analysis of plant use at HG, in the Hu Semaineh region, Egypt, Archéo-Nil sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [144] MN Ramsey, 2018, Sheltered by reeds and settled on sedges: Construction and use of a twenty thousand-year-old hut according to phytolith analysis from Kharaneh IV, Jordan, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [145] ML Murungi, 2020, Revised taxonomic interpretations of Cyperaceae phytoliths for (paleo)botanical studies with some notes on terminology, Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [146] M Fernández Honaine, 2009, A phytolith analysis of Cyperaceae from the Pampean region, Argentina, Australian Journal of Botany sourceSupported

Rare rainfall events in the Thebes region are not derived from the Mediterranean Sea (Thera), but are occasionally generated by the atmospheric Red Sea Trough, extending from the African Monsoon over equatorial Africa northward over the Red Sea region.

“Rare rainfall events in the Thebes region are not derived from the Mediterranean Sea (Thera), but are occasionally generated by the atmospheric Red Sea Trough, extending from the African Monsoon over equatorial Africa northward over the Red Sea region [195,196].”

• cites [195] MB Moawad, 2014, Flash floods in the Sahara: a case study for the 28 January 2013 flood in Qena, Egypt, Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk sourcePartly supported

  Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [196] AJ de Vries, 2013, Extreme precipitation events in the Middle East: Dynamics of the Active Red Sea Trough, JGR Atmospheres sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Our 14C investigation of Egyptian museum objects supports a date for the Minoan Thera eruption within the Second Intermediate Period.

“Therefore, our 14C investigation of Egyptian museum objects support a date for the Minoan Thera eruption within the Second Intermediate Period [60,67].”

• cites [60] SW Manning, 2022, Second Intermediate Period date for the Thera (Santorini) eruption and historical implications, PLoS One sourceSupported
• cites [67] SW Manning, 2024, Problems of Dating Spread on Radiocarbon Calibration Curve Plateaus: The 1620–1540 BC Example and the Dating of the Therasia Olive Shrub Samples and Thera Volcanic Eruption, Radiocarbon sourceSupported

The uncalibrated radiocarbon dates of 17th and early 18th Dynasty objects and the uncalibrated radiocarbon dates of the Minoan Thera eruption have a different time signature.

“Comparing our uncalibrated dates of 17th and early 18th Dynasty objects with a robust series of uncalibrated radiocarbon dates for the Minoan Thera eruption, it becomes clear that the two data sets have a different time signature.”

• Also stated in: § Objectives of our investigation · boosted

  “We achieved clear results, showing that the two groups of dates, i.e. Egypt’s 17th to 18th Dynasty transition period and the Minoan Thera eruption are not synchronous.”

The Minoan eruption is older than the reign of Nebpehtire Ahmose, the first king of the 18th Dynasty.

“The Minoan eruption is older than the reign of Nebpehtire Ahmose, the first king of the 18th Dynasty, who reunited Upper and Lower Egypt.”

The stamped throne name Nebpehtire of Ahmose (II) on brick EA 32689 is the same as in the published image of a brick from the Temple of Ahmose.

“Comparing the image (Fig 3) of a brick from the Temple of Ahmose published in 1902 [138] with the photograph of brick EA 32689 in the British Museum, taken by the first author (Fig 4), it can clearly be seen, notwithstanding the crack running through the latter mudbrick, that the stamped throne name Nebpehtire of Ahmose (II) is the same in both images.”

• cites [138] D Randall-MacIver, 1902Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The British Museum collection includes an unbaked clay brick bearing the stamped prenomen of Pharaoh Ahmose (II), Nebpehtire.

“The collection of the British Museum in London includes an unbaked clay brick bearing the stamped prenomen of Pharaoh Ahmose (II), i.e., Nebpehtire in hieroglyphic script.”

The uncalibrated radiocarbon date of GrM-15973 is 3285 ± 45 BP, virtually the same as the date 3290 ± 40 BP of the previous mudbrick lump sample GrA-59737.

“The uncalibrated radiocarbon date of GrM-15973 is 3285 ± 45 BP, virtually the same as the date 3290 ± 40 BP of the previous mudbrick lump sample GrA-59737 (Table 4).”

The calibrated radiocarbon date of GrM-15201 is older than the time of mudbrick fabrication by 61-183 years.

“The calibrated radiocarbon date of GrM-15201 is older by 61–183 years (1741–1619 cal BCE).”

The 14C date of Ahmose mudbrick lump sample GrA-59737 is measured as 3290 BP.

“Summarizing, the 14C date of the Ahmose mudbrick lump sample GrA-59737 is measured as 3290 BP.”

This result is about 100 radiocarbon years older than the 14C date of the pure straw fragment.

“This result is about 100 radiocarbon years older than the 14C date of the pure straw fragment (Table 4).”

The δ13C values of the other mudbrick lump samples are typical for C3 plants.

“The δ13C values of these samples are typical for C3 plants.”

Assuming 5% contamination, the ageing effect is about 100 years.

“When we assume 5% contamination, this effect is about 100 years.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: In the theoretical example, the mudbrick lump sample is contaminated with 5% older organic material.

Concerning the 5 dates we obtained of different sub-samples of the Ahmose mudbrick, 4 dates (GrA-59737, GrM-15973, GrM-15201, GrM-14176/14177) are derived from mud with mixed organic remains larger than the sieve openings of 0.2 mm.

“Concerning the 5 dates we obtained of different sub-samples of the Ahmose mudbrick, 4 dates (GrA-59737, GrM-15973, GrM-15201, GrM-14176/14177) are derived from mud with mixed organic remains larger than the sieve openings of 0.2 mm.”

Our δ13C measurement, −12.4 ‰, of the pure straw sample (GrA-64347) from the Ahmose mudbrick sits in between these values.

“Our δ13C measurement, −12.4 ‰, of the pure straw sample (GrA-64347) from the Ahmose mudbrick sits in between these values.”

It is important to realize that the δ13C values of samples GrA-59737, GrM-15973, GrM-15201, GrM-14176, GrM-14177 resulted from a mixture of unknown plant fragments of various sizes (>0.2 mm), not from a single piece of straw.

“It is important to realize that the δ13C values of samples GrA-59737, GrM-15973, GrM-15201, GrM-14176, GrM-14177 resulted from a mixture of unknown plant fragments of various sizes (>0.2 mm), not from a single piece of straw.”

Only one sample (GrA-64347) consisted of a single piece of straw without attached soil mud.

“Only one sample (GrA-64347) consisted of a single piece of straw without attached soil mud.”

The 5 dates combined do not pass the chi-square test.

“Indeed, the 5 dates combined do not pass the chi-square test.”

A thin section of the Ahmose mudbrick revealed the presence of a small plant fragment, 1.4 mm long, belonging to the Cyperaceae family.

“Moreover, a thin section of the Ahmose mudbrick (Fig 6) revealed the presence of a small plant fragment, 1.4 mm long, belonging to the Cyperaceae family.”

The radiocarbon date of pure straw GrA-64347 is 3230 ± 60 BP.

“Let us now consider the only radiocarbon date (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) we have of a single piece of pure straw, which belongs to the largest plant fragments visible in brick EA 32689 (Fig 5).”

The single piece of straw (GrA-64347) has a δ13C value of −12.4 ‰.

“The single piece of straw (GrA-64347) has a δ13C value of −12.4 ‰ (Table 4).”

The weighted average of the three radiocarbon dates from high-carbon samples (GrA-64347, GrA-59737, GrM-15973) is 3276 ± 27 BP.

“The resulting weighted average date of 3276 ± 27 BP is statistically acceptable, passing the chi-square test: df = 2 T = 0.7(5% 6.0).”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The two mudbrick lump samples GrA-59737 and GrM-15973 contained a significant amount of straw fragments.

Sample GrA-64347 is a C4 plant, as shown by its δ13C value of −12.4‰.

“Since sample GrA-64347 is a C4 plant, as shown by its δ13C value of −12.4 ‰ (Table 4), it may have been a sedge growing throughout the year in the riverine Nile valley in areas where there is enough soil moisture.”

The radiocarbon date of linen burial cloth EA 37106 is 3310 ± 25 BP (GrA-59770).

“The sample was measured twice (duplo) in order to increase dating reliability and to obtain a weighted average result with a small standard deviation: 3310 ± 25 BP (GrA-59770).”

The uncalibrated date of EA 37106 is about 80 radiocarbon years older than the 14C date of straw (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) in the mudbrick of Ahmose.

“In fact, the uncalibrated date is about 80 radiocarbon years older than the 14C date of straw (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) in the mudbrick of Ahmose, the father of Amenhotep I.”

The δ13C values of the six shabtis range from −26.6‰ to −29.3‰.

“The δ13C values of the six shabtis range from −26.6 ‰ to −29.3 ‰ (Table 6).”

Including the seasonal offset of 12 ± 5 14C years in calibration lowers the calibrated date of EA 37106 by only a few years.

“The difference between the two calibration results is very small indeed; the seasonal offset lowers the calibrated date by only a few years (Table 5).”

The 95.4% probability calibrated age range of shabti UC 40179 is 1535-1426 cal BCE.

“The 95.4% probability calibrated age range of shabti UC 40179 (Fig 15) is 1535–1426 cal BCE.”

Shabti UC 40182 yielded an uncalibrated radiocarbon date of 3288 ± 30 BP (GrM-12684).

“The 14C date of shabti UC 40182 is 3288 ± 30 BP (GrM-12684)”

The 14C date of shabti UC 40182 is very similar to the date of shabti UC 40178 (3295 ± 28 BP, GrM-31118).

“being very similar as the date of shabti UC 40178 (Table 6), 3295 ± 28 BP (GrM-31118).”

Shabti UC 40181 is about 45 radiocarbon years younger than the straw fragment in the mudbrick of Nebpehtire Ahmose (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP).

“about 45 radiocarbon years younger than the straw fragment in the mudbrick of Nebpehtire Ahmose (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP)”

The calibrated date of UC 40178 has 68.3% probability ranges 1610-1575 cal BCE (32.3%) and 1563-1518 cal BCE (35.9%).

“The 68.3% probability range shows two calibrated ages: 1610–1575 cal BCE (32.3%) and 1563–1518 cal BCE (35.9%), respectively (Table 6).”

Shabti UC 40181 is the youngest of all six shabtis investigated.

“shows it to be the youngest of all six shabtis investigated (Table 6)”

The uncalibrated 14C date of shabti UC 40179 is very similar to the 14C date of the Ahmose mudbrick pure straw sample GrA-64347 (3230 ± 60 yr BP).

“This result is very similar as our 14C date for the Ahmose mudbrick, based on the pure straw sample (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 yr BP).”

The olive branch date 3331 ± 10 BP fits very well in the range of individual radiocarbon dates for the volcanic destruction layer at Akrotiri.

“fits very well in the range of individual radiocarbon dates for the volcanic destruction layer at Akrotiri (Table 7, Fig 25).”

Shabti UC 40179 yielded an uncalibrated radiocarbon date of 3224 ± 30 yr BP (GrM-12680).

“The tiny wood sample of shabti UC 40179, taken from its feet part, as indicated by a white arrow (Fig 14), yielded an uncalibrated radiocarbon date (Table 6) of 3224 ± 30 yr BP (GrM-12680).”

The 68.3% probability calibrated date of shabti UC 40181 comprises two age ranges, 1497-1474 (29.8%) and 1461-1430 (38.5%) cal BCE.

“The 68.3% probability calibrated date (Fig 17) comprises two age ranges, 1497–1474 (29.8%) and 1461–1430 (38.5%) cal BCE”

Shabti UC 40181 yielded an uncalibrated radiocarbon date of 3185 ± 30 BP (GrM-12683).

“The 14C date (GrM-12683, 3185 ± 30 BP) shows it to be the youngest of all six shabtis investigated (Table 6)”

The uncalibrated 14C date of shabti UC 40178 is about 65 radiocarbon years older than the pure straw fragment in the Ahmose brick (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP).

“The uncalibrated 14C date (GrM 31118, 3295 ± 28 BP) of shabti UC 40178 is about 65 radiocarbon years older than the pure straw fragment in the Ahmose brick (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP).”

The uncalibrated 14C date of shabti UC 40182 is about 60 radiocarbon years older than the pure straw fragment in the Ahmose brick (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP).

“The uncalibrated 14C date (GrM-12684, 3288 ± 30 BP) of shabti UC 40182 is about 60 radiocarbon years older than the pure straw fragment in the Ahmose brick (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP).”

Shabti UC 40184 yielded an uncalibrated radiocarbon date of 3251 ± 30 BP (GrM-12685).

“The uncalibrated radiocarbon date (Table 6) of shabti UC 40184 is 3251 ± 30 BP (GrM-12685).”

The radiocarbon date of shabti UC 40178 is 3295 ± 28 yr BP (GrM-31118).

“The conventional uncalibrated radiocarbon date (Table 6) is 3295 ± 28 yr BP (GrM-31118).”

The uncalibrated 14C date of shabti UC 40196 is about 70 radiocarbon years older than the straw fragment in the Ahmose brick (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP).

“which is about 70 radiocarbon years older than the straw fragment in the Ahmose brick (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP).”

The Palaikastro 14C date range is very similar to the range of 14C dates for the volcanic destruction layer at Akrotiri, Thera.

“which is very similar as the range of 14C dates for the volcanic destruction layer at Akrotiri, Thera (Table 7, Fig 25).”

Shabti UC 40179 is only about 6 radiocarbon years younger than the Ahmose mudbrick pure straw sample.

“Shabti UC 40179 is only about 6 radiocarbon years younger than the former”

Due to the plateau in the calibration curve, there is also some overlap of shabti UC 40196 with the earliest part of the 18th Dynasty.

“Due to the plateau in the calibration curve, there is also some overlap with the earliest part of the 18th Dynasty.”

The weighted average of the 13 Akrotiri dates is 3344 ± 8 BP.

“The weighted average is 3344 ± 8 BP (Table 7, Fig 25).”

The calibration graph of the 14C measurement of the pure straw fragment (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) shows that the age range 1542-1427 cal BCE has the highest probability (66.4%).

“The calibration graph of the 14C measurement of the pure straw fragment (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) shows that the age range 1542–1427 cal BCE (Fig 7) has the highest probability (66.4%).”

Two other Teti-sa-intef shabtis have virtually the same 14C date: shabti UC 40178, 3295 ± 28 BP (GrM-31118) and shabti UC 40182, 3288 ± 30 BP (GrM-12684).

“However, two other Teti-sa-intef shabtis have virtually the same 14C date: shabti UC 40178, 3295 ± 28 BP (GrM-31118) and shabti UC 40182, 3288 ± 30 BP (GrM-12684).”

A microscopic investigation of a thin section made of an intact piece of the Ahmose mudbrick revealed a plant fragment with a length of only 1.4 mm.

“A microscopic investigation of a thin section made of an intact piece of the Ahmose mudbrick revealed a plant fragment with a length of only 1.4 mm (Fig 6).”

The radiocarbon measurements of linen burial cloth EA 37106, measured in duplo, yielded a date of 3310 ± 25 BP (GrA-59770).

“However, the radiocarbon measurements of linen burial cloth EA 37106 (Table 3), measured in duplo, yielded a date of 3310 ± 25 BP (GrA-59770).”

Four samples of the Ahmose mudbrick composed of mudbrick aggregates and plant/organic remains >0.2 mm yielded 14C dates older by 60-155 radiocarbon years than a single pure straw fragment (GrA-64347).

“Indeed, 4 samples of the Ahmose mudbrick, composed of mudbrick aggregates (lumps) and plant/organic remains of various sizes >0.2 mm (GrA-59737, GrM-15973, GrM-15201, GrM-14176/14177), yielded 14C dates older by 60–155 radiocarbon years than a single pure straw fragment (GrA-64347).”

The radiocarbon result of linen burial cloth EA 37106 is the oldest obtained in the investigation of 17th to early 18th Dynasty museum objects of ancient Egypt.

“This is the oldest radiocarbon result we obtained in our investigation of 17th to early 18th Dynasty museum objects of ancient Egypt (Table 7, Fig 25).”

The uncalibrated radiocarbon date of shabti UC 40179 (3224 ± 30 yr BP, GrM-12680) is virtually the same as the 14C date of the pure straw fragment of the Ahmose mudbrick (3230 ± 60 yr BP, GrA-64347).

“The uncalibrated radiocarbon date of shabti UC 40179 (3224 ± 30 yr BP, GrM-12680) is virtually the same as the 14C date of the pure straw fragment of the Ahmose mudbrick (3230 ± 60 yr BP, GrA-64347).”

Three shabtis yielded calibrated age ranges situated largely in the 17th Dynasty (UC 40178 Teta-sa-antef, UC 40182 Teta-sa-antef, UC 40196 Djehuty).

“Three shabtis yielded calibrated age ranges (Table 6) situated largely in the 17th Dynasty (UC 40178 Teta-sa-antef, UC 40182 Teta-sa-antef, UC 40196 Djehuty).”

All uncalibrated 14C dates of the six shabtis are younger than uncalibrated 14C dates of the Minoan Santorini eruption.

“All uncalibrated 14C dates of the six shabtis are younger than uncalibrated 14C dates of the Minoan Santorini eruption (Table 7, Fig 25).”

The Palaikastro average is only marginally older than the average for the Akrotiri dates.

“The Palaikastro average is only marginally older than the average for the Akrotiri dates.”

The uncalibrated 14C measurement of mummy wrapping EA 37106 is about 80 radiocarbon years older than the 14C date BP of the pure straw fragment (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) in the Ahmose mudbrick.

“For comparison, the above uncalibrated 14C radiocarbon measurement of mummy wrapping EA 37106 is about 80 radiocarbon years older than the 14C date BP of the pure straw fragment (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) in the Ahmose mudbrick.”

The large straw fragment (GrA-64347) is not derived from wheat or barley because its δ13C value is −12.4 ‰, i.e., a plant with C4 photosynthesis.

“The large straw fragment (GrA-64347) is not derived from wheat or barley, because its δ13C value is −12.4 ‰ (Table 5), i.e., a plant with C4 photosynthesis.”

The 1σ calibrated age (highest relative probability) of the burial cloth EA 37106 gives two age ranges 1612-1573 (39.8%) and 1566-1538 (28.5%) cal BCE.

“The 1σ calibrated age (highest relative probability) of the burial cloth (Fig 10) gives two age ranges 1612–1573 (39.8%) and 1566–1538 (28.5%) cal BCE.”

The weighted average of the five Palaikastro dates is 3351 ± 17 BP.

“The weighted average of the five Palaikastro dates, 3351 ± 17 BP”

The 14C measurements of the six stick shabtis range from 3300 ± 30 BP (GrM-31119; shabti UC 40196) to 3185 ± 30 BP (GrM-12683; shabti UC 40181).

“Their 14C measurements (Tables 6, 7 and Fig 25) range from 3300 ± 30 BP (GrM-31119; shabti UC 40196) to 3185 ± 30 BP (GrM-12683; shabti UC 40181).”

The most significant result is from shabti UC 40179, on which the name Teti-(mes)u is written as dedicator.

“The most significant result is from shabti UC 40179, on which the name Teti-(mes)u is written as dedicator.”

The two tallest peaks within the age range 1542-1427 cal BCE are centered around 1500 and 1470 cal BCE.

“The two tallest peaks within this age range are centered around 1500 and 1470 cal BCE.”

Both groups (Egyptian museum objects and Minoan Thera eruption) clearly have a different 14C time signature.

“Both groups clearly have a different 14C time signature.”

The 14C date of shabti UC 40179 is only about 6 radiocarbon years younger than the straw of the Ahmose brick.

“The 14C date of shabti UC 40179 is only about 6 radiocarbon years younger than the straw of the Ahmose brick.”

Considering all radiocarbon results of ancient Egyptian museum objects belonging to the 17th and early 18th Dynasties, the uncalibrated 14C dates of the Minoan Thera eruption are older than the former.

“Considering all our radiocarbon results of ancient Egyptian museum objects belonging to the 17th and early 18th Dynasties, it can be seen in Table 7 and Fig 25 that the uncalibrated 14C dates of the Minoan Thera eruption are older than the former.”

The genealogical time distance between year 1 of Merhetepre Ini to year 1 of Nebpehtire Ahmose is independent of the fall of Avaris and the archaeology of Tell el-Dab'a.

“Moreover, the genealogical time distance between year 1 of Merhetepre Ini to year 1 of Nebpehtire Ahmose is independent of the fall of Avaris and the archaeology of Tell el-Dab’a [18,136,137].”

• cites [18] M. Bietak, 2003, Science versus archaeology: Problems and consequences of high Aegean chronology.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [136] M. Bietak, 2024, The Timespan of Hyksos Rule (15th Dynasty). sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [137] DA. Aston, 2018, How Early (and How Late) can Khyan really be. An Essay based on Conventional Archaeological Methods.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Bayesian sequence modelling cannot be conducted for the First and Second Intermediate Periods because knowledge about sequences of kings and their respective reign lengths in these periods is usually uncertain and full of lacunas.

“Bayesian sequence modelling, the principal methodology in their research, cannot be conducted for these Intermediate Periods.”

• Also stated in: § Radiocarbon dating of Dynastic Egypt · plain

  “Knowledge about sequences of kings and their respective reign lengths in these periods are usually uncertain and full of lacunas, but such information is essential to enable sequence modelling [77].”

• cites [77] A Bayliss, 2022Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The prenomen on the mudbrick makes the connection with Pharaoh Ahmose (II) unmistakable.

“Since the name Ahmose was quite common during the late 17th Dynasty, the prenomen, also termed cartouche name or throne name, makes the connection of the mudbrick with Pharao Ahmose (II) unmistakable.”

Radiocarbon dating by itself cannot determine the accession year and reign length of a king.

“Radiocarbon dating by itself cannot determine the accession year and reign length of a king.”

Bennett's historical genealogical chronometric studies provide a direct time link between the 12th and the 18th dynasty, independent of unresolved matters concerning the respective chronological relationships between the 13th, 15th, 16th and 17th Dynasties.

“In conclusion, Bennett’s historical genealogical chronometric studies provide a direct time link between the 12th and the 18th dynasty, independent of unresolved matters concerning the respective chronological relationships between the 13th, 15th, 16th and 17th Dynasties.”

• cites Bennett [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Because the investigated items cannot be arranged in a stratigraphic sequence, Bayesian analysis could not be used.

“Since the above items cannot be arranged in a stratigraphic sequence, Bayesian analysis could not be used.”

• Also stated in: § Materials and methods · plain

  “The comparative rarity of organic museum objects associated with the 17th to early 18th Dynasty transition period did not allow selection of samples that can be neatly arranged in a historical sequence. Therefore, Bayesian sequence analysis could not be used in our investigation.”

Relative dating within 14C time space can give meaningful results.

“Relative dating within 14C time space can give meaningful results.”

The Second Intermediate Period embodies a significant time interval, as also indicated by Bennett's genealogical studies of the El-Kab governors.

“Therefore, the Second Intermediate Period, sandwiched in between these united Egyptian Kingdoms, embodies a significant time interval, as also indicated by Bennett’s genealogical studies of the El-Kab governors.”

The calibrated results support a low chronology for the reign of Ahmose and the beginning of the New Kingdom.

“Our calibrated results support a low chronology for his reign and the beginning of the New Kingdom.”

The year 22 of Ahmose is specifically recorded in the Turah limestone quarries, which the king reopened.

“The year 22 of Ahmose is specifically recorded in the important Turah limestone quarries, which the king reopened [80,111].”

• cites [80] E. Hornung, 2006, The New Kingdom. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [111] Harvey SP. The Cults of King Ahmose at Abydos. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. 1998. Available from: https://find.library.upenn.edu/catalog/9949710683503681?hld_id=resource_link_0Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Allen's suggestion that Turin King-list lines 11.16-11.31 relate to the 17th Dynasty seems less likely because the 5 partially surviving names in this section cannot be associated with attested names of known 17th Dynasty kings.

“The above suggestion by Allen [119] seems less likely, because the 5 partially surviving names in this section of the Turin King-list cannot be associated with attested names of known 17th Dynasty kings.”

• cites Allen [119] JP. Allen, 2010, The Second Intermediate Period in the Turin King-list.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The low historical chronologies by Krauss and Warburton (1502 BCE) and Hornung et al. (1517 BCE) for Ahmose year 22 are nearest to the calibrated radiocarbon date of both peaks of GrA-64347.

“Taking into account that mudbrick fabrication probably occurred around year 22 of Ahmose’s reign [80,111,112], the low historical chronologies by Krauss and Warburton [89] and Hornung et al. [76], respectively 1502 BCE [89] and 1517 BCE [76] for Ahmose year 22, are nearest to the calibrated radiocarbon date of both peaks.”

• cites [89] R Krauss, 2009, The basis for the Egyptian dates. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [76] E Hornung, 2006 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Evaluating our 5 uncalibrated radiocarbon dates, obtained from different sub-samples of the Ahmose mudbrick, it is clear that the variance between the results is too large in order to consider their weighted average as representing the time of mudbrick fabrication.

“Evaluating our 5 uncalibrated radiocarbon dates, obtained from different sub-samples of the Ahmose mudbrick, it is clear that the variance between the results is too large in order to consider their weighted average as representing the time of mudbrick fabrication.”

Therefore, this largest single plant fragment, without attached soil mud, is regarded by us as representing the actual radiocarbon time of mudbrick fabrication: 3230 ± 60 BP (GrA-64347).

“Therefore, this largest single plant fragment, without attached soil mud, is regarded by us as representing the actual radiocarbon time of mudbrick fabrication(Table 4): 3230 ± 60 BP (GrA-64347).”

Sample GrM-15201 can be safely rejected in relation to the fabrication time of the Ahmose mudbrick.

“Sample GrM-15201 can be safely rejected in relation to the fabrication time of the Ahmose mudbrick.”

The 14C date of the straw DRI-2948 is compatible with historical chronologies.

“However, the 14C date of the straw (DRI-2948, 3442 ± 41 BP) is compatible with historical chronologies.”

Hence, it seems that the Ahmose mudbrick contains organic carbon of different ages and origin, possibly including Nilotic debris and organic remains of previous human activities.

“Hence, it seems that the Ahmose mudbrick contains organic carbon of different ages and origin, possibly including Nilotic debris and organic remains of previous human activities.”

A precise radiocarbon date is not necessarily an accurate date.

“The calibration result shows that a precise date is not necessarily an accurate date.”

Based on the above findings and experience, the youngest 14C result within a series of radiocarbon dates from a specific mudbrick is more likely to represent the 'fresh' vegetation added to the mud at the time of brick fabrication.

“Based on the above findings and experience, the youngest 14C result within a series of radiocarbon dates from a specific mudbrick is more likely to represent the “fresh” vegetation added to the mud at the time of brick fabrication.”

The mudbrick from the Temple of Ahmose at Abydos was most likely fabricated in year 22 of his reign, which would be 1558 BCE in the highest historical age assessment.

“The mudbrick from the Temple of Ahmose at Abydos (Fig 2) was most likely fabricated in year 22 of his reign [80,111,112], which would be 1558 BCE (Table 2) in the highest historical age assessment [88].”

• cites [80] E. Hornung, 2006, The New Kingdom. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [111] Harvey SP. The Cults of King Ahmose at Abydos. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. 1998. Available from: https://find.library.upenn.edu/catalog/9949710683503681?hld_id=resource_link_0Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [112] Harvey SP. Abydos. The Oriental Institute 2002–2003 Annual Report. Available from: http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/AR/02-03/02-03_AR_TOC.htmlNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [88] JH Breasted, 1909Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

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].”

• cites [97] MW Dee, 2012, Antiquity sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The calibrated results of GrM-15201 are much older than all historical dating options for the reign of Nebpehtire Ahmose.

“These results of mudbrick lump sample GrM-15201 (Fig 7) are much older than all historical dating options (Table 2) for the reign of Nebpehtire Ahmose.”

The calibrated radiocarbon date of the straw DRI-2948 fits the historical time options for Amenemhet III.

“Hence, the calibrated radiocarbon date of the straw fits the above historical time options.”

Our calibrated radiocarbon date of the large single piece of straw (GrA-64347), representing the time of fabrication of the Ahmose mudbrick from the Temple of Ahmose at Abydos (ca year 22 of his reign), supports a low chronology for year 1 of Nebpehtire Ahmose.

“Our calibrated radiocarbon date (Fig 8) of the large single piece of straw (GrA-64347), representing the time of fabrication of the Ahmose mudbrick from the Temple of Ahmose at Abydos (ca year 22 of his reign), supports a low chronology for year 1 of Nebpehtire Ahmose.”

Our radiocarbon dating results of the Ahmose mudbrick, coupled with Bennett's chronology, would place the younger calibrated age range of burial cloth EA 37106 in the 17th Dynasty.

“Our radiocarbon dating results of the Ahmose mudbrick, coupled with Bennet’s [113] historical chronology, would also place the younger calibrated age range of burial cloth EA 37106 in the 17th Dynasty.”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The calibrated 2σ dating range of EA 37106, 1624-1510 cal BCE (95.4%), covers the 17th Dynasty and its transition to the beginning of the 18th Dynasty.

“Notwithstanding the above questions concerning mummy wrapping EA 37106, its calibrated 2σ dating range, 1624–1510 cal BCE (95.4%), unquestionably covers the 17th Dynasty and its transition to the beginning of the 18th Dynasty.”

Radiocarbon dating corroborates Bennett's historical chronology investigation.

“Radiocarbon dating corroborates the unique historical chronology investigation by Bennett [113], based on his genealogical study of the governors of El-Kab.”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The inclusion of two 14C dates containing a mixture of straw and mudbrick material in the weighted average probably gave a result that is too old, due to likely presence of older organic contaminants.

“Concerning the average of three radiocarbon dates of the Ahmose mudbrick (Fig 9), based on samples with a high carbon content, it must be emphasized again that the inclusion of two 14C dates containing a mixture of straw and mudbrick material probably gave a result that is too old, due to the likely presence in the mud of organic “contaminants” predating the time of mudbrick production.”

Other historical dating options for year 22 of Ahmose fit the wide calibrated age range of GrA-64347 with somewhat lower probability, except the two highest chronologies (1558 BCE and 1548 BCE).

“However, also other historical dating options for year 22 of Ahmose (Table 2) fit, with somewhat lower probability, the wide calibrated age range (Fig 8) of 1542–1427 cal BCE (66.4%), except for the two highest chronologies, i.e., 1558 BCE [88] and 1548 BCE [129].”

• cites [88] JH Breasted, 1909Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [129] EF Wente, 1976, A Chronology of the New Kingdom.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Bennett calculated a minimum time interval of 315 years between year 7 of Senusert III and year 1 of Nebpehtire Ahmose.

“He calculated a minimum time interval of 315 years between year 7 of Senusert III (12th Dynasty) and year 1 of Nebpehtire Ahmose [113].”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The historical dates suggested by Bennett for year 7 of Senusert III (1872 or 1866 BCE) fit very well within the radiocarbon dating results of Bronk Ramsey et al.

“The historical dates suggested by Bennett [113] for year 7 of Senusert III are 1872 or 1866 BCE, both fitting very well within these radiocarbon dating results.”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

It is inappropriate to make a minor correction for a possible reservoir effect for GrA-64347 because it may have been a sedge growing throughout the year, including late summer when 14C in air is at maximum.

“Therefore, we consider it inappropriate to make a minor correction for a possible reservoir effect that might have been caused if the plant would have grown only in the late winter season when 14C in the air is at a minimum [159].”

• cites [159] B Kromer, 2001, Regional 14CO2 offsets in the troposphere: magnitude, mechanisms, and consequences, Science sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The 68.3% probability radiocarbon dating result of Satdjehuty's burial cloth is significantly older than most historical dating options for the reign of Amenhotep I.

“Given the historical indication that Satdjehuty probably died during the reign of Amenhotep I, it is striking that the 68.3% probability radiocarbon dating result of Satdjehuty’s burial cloth is significantly older than most historical dating options for the reign of Amenhotep I (Table 2).”

Most historical Egyptian chronology options for year 22 of Ahmose fit the weighted average age range at somewhat lower probability, except the high chronologies.

“However, at somewhat lower probability, most historical Egyptian chronology options for year 22 of Ahmose (Table 2) fit this age range, except for the high chronologies [88,129].”

• cites [88] JH Breasted, 1909Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [129] EF Wente, 1976, A Chronology of the New Kingdom.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Our investigation of the Ahmose mudbrick EA 32689 provides the first ever radiocarbon measurements regarding his reign and the beginning of the 18th Dynasty.

“Our investigation of the Ahmose mudbrick EA 32689, stamped with his throne name Nebpehtire (Fig 4), provide the first ever radiocarbon measurements regarding his reign and the beginning of the 18th Dynasty.”

The calibrated radiocarbon dating results of shabti UC 40179 support the historical likelihood that the death of Tetiky and the construction of his tomb TT15 occurred during the reign of Amenhotep I.

“These calibrated radiocarbon dating results, both situated in the early 18th Dynasty, support the historical likelihood that the death of Tetiky and the construction of his tomb TT15 occurred during the reign of Amenhotep I.”

The position of the tall peak around 1500 cal BCE of the calibrated radiocarbon age range of shabti UC 40179 fits the historical dating options for Amenhotep I.

“Hence the position of the tall peak around 1500 cal BCE (Fig 15) of the calibrated radiocarbon age range fits the above historical dating options.”

• cites Hornung et al 2006 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites Krauss and Warburton 2009 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The older time options for shabti UC 40182 support a 17th Dynasty age, as suggested by Petrie.

“The older time options support a 17th Dynasty age, as suggested by Petrie [94].”

• cites [94] WMF Petrie, 1935Not checked — no full text of the source

The 68.3% calibrated age ranges of shabti UC 40181 clearly belong to the early 18th Dynasty.

“which clearly belong to the early 18th Dynasty.”

Our dating results support a low chronology for the first two kings of the early 18th Dynasty.

“Our dating results support a low chronology for the first two kings of the early 18th Dynasty.”

A second peak of shabti UC 40184 has a lower probability (16.3%) age range of 1477−1456 cal BCE, partly coinciding with the reign of Hatshepsut & Thutmose III.

“A second peak has a lower probability (16.3%) age range of 1477−1456 cal BCE, partly coinciding with the reign of Hatshepsut & Thutmose III (Table 2).”

The similarity in radiocarbon dates between Akrotiri, the Thera olive branch, and Palaikastro indicates that the former radiocarbon dates were not influenced by magmatic volcanic CO2 gas lacking 14C.

“This similarity in radiocarbon dates between Akrotiri, the Thera olive branch, both next to the volcano, and Palaikastro at 160 km south-east from the volcano, indicates that the former radiocarbon dates were not influenced by magmatic volcanic CO2 gas lacking 14C [194].”

• cites [194] HJ Bruins, 2014, The Thera olive branch, Akrotiri (Thera) and Palaikastro (Crete): comparing radiocarbon results of the Santorini eruption, Antiquity sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The 14C date of shabti UC 40179 gives independent support for a low chronology of the reigns of Nebpehtire Ahmose and Amenhotep I.

“Therefore, the 14C date of shabti UC 40179 gives independent support for a low chronology of the reigns of Nebpehtire Ahmose and Amenhotep I.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The dedicator Teti-(mes)u on shabti UC 40179 is the same person as the Teti-mesu attested on figures in tomb TT15 of Tetiky.

The uncalibrated radiocarbon date of the outermost tree rings of the olive branch at Thera is 3331 ± 10 BP (Hd-23588/24402).

“The uncalibrated radiocarbon date of the outermost tree rings, 3331 ± 10 BP (Hd-23588/24402)”

• cites [192] WL Friedrich, 2006, Santorini eruption radiocarbon dated to 1627–1600 B.C, Science sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [193] WL Friedrich, 2009, The Minoan eruption of Santorini radiocarbon dated to 1613 ± 13 BC – geological and stratigraphic considerations. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The calculation of the weighted average of the 13 Akrotiri dates passes the Chi-square test [df = 12 T = 10.7(5% 21.0)], indicating that the 13 dates form a consistent group.

“The calculation passes the Chi-square test [df = 12 T = 10.7(5% 21.0)], indicating that the 13 dates form a consistent group.”

Our radiocarbon dating result supports a date for shabti UC 40178 in the 17th Dynasty.

“Our radiocarbon dating result also supports a date for shabti UC 40178 in the 17th Dynasty.”

The historical dating by Petrie of shabti UC 40178 to the 17th Dynasty is confirmed by linguistic dating.

“The historical dating by Petrie [86] of shabti UC 40178 to the 17th Dynasty is confirmed by linguistic dating, as the hieroglyphic writing on this shabti of the god Sokar “with the two diagonal strokes is the most common form used during the Second Intermediate Period” [95,182, p. 3].”

• cites [86] SW Manning, 1999Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [95,182, p. 3]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The Ahmose mudbrick pure straw sample represents the last years (ca year 22) of the reign of Ahmose.

“which represents the last years (ca year 22) of the reign of Ahmose.”

• cites [111] Harvey SP. The Cults of King Ahmose at Abydos. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. 1998. Available from: https://find.library.upenn.edu/catalog/9949710683503681?hld_id=resource_link_0Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [112] Harvey SP. Abydos. The Oriental Institute 2002–2003 Annual Report. Available from: http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/AR/02-03/02-03_AR_TOC.htmlNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The similar 14C dates of shabti UC 40179 and the Ahmose mudbrick confirm their suggested historical relationship based on the name Teti-mesu.

“The similar 14C dates of the two samples confirm their suggested historical relationship, based on the name Teti-mesu.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The dedicator Teti-(mes)u on shabti UC 40179 is the same person as the Teti-mesu attested on figures in tomb TT15 of Tetiky.

These calibrated results of EA 37106, fitting the 17th Dynasty, are unmistakably older than historical age assessments for the reign of Amenhotep I.

“These results, fitting the 17th Dynasty, are unmistakably older than historical age assessments for the reign of Amenhotep I (Table 2).”

The weighted average of the five Palaikastro dates passes the chi-square test [df = 4 T = 3.8(5% 9.5)].

“passes the chi-square test [df = 4 T = 3.8(5% 9.5)].”

Radiocarbon dating supports the unique historical genealogical chronometric study by Bennett [113].

“Radiocarbon dating supports the unique historical genealogical chronometric study by Bennett [113].”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The radiocarbon date of the pure straw fragment (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) relates to ca year 22 of the reign of Nebpehtire Ahmose, when his Temple at Abydos was built after his victory over the Hyksos.

“Therefore, its radiocarbon date (GrA-64347, 3230 ± 60 BP) relates to ca year 22 of the reign of Nebpehtire Ahmose, when his Temple at Abydos was built after his victory over the Hyksos [111,112].”

• cites [111] Harvey SP. The Cults of King Ahmose at Abydos. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. 1998. Available from: https://find.library.upenn.edu/catalog/9949710683503681?hld_id=resource_link_0Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [112] Harvey SP. Abydos. The Oriental Institute 2002–2003 Annual Report. Available from: http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/AR/02-03/02-03_AR_TOC.htmlNot matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Bennett's calculation is independent of the fall of Avaris and the archaeology of Tell el-Dab'a.

“The calculation by Bennett is independent of the fall of Avaris and the archaeology of Tell el-Dab’a [18,136,137].”

• cites [18] M. Bietak, 2003, Science versus archaeology: Problems and consequences of high Aegean chronology.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [136] M. Bietak, 2024, The Timespan of Hyksos Rule (15th Dynasty). sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [137] DA. Aston, 2018, How Early (and How Late) can Khyan really be. An Essay based on Conventional Archaeological Methods.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

This may indicate that both shabtis UC 40178 and UC 40182 were made for the same individual.

“This may indicate that both shabtis were made for the same individual.”

Bones from domesticated animals (cattle, sheep, goats) found in the tsunami deposits at Palaikastro tend to be a few years older than seeds from annual plants found at Akrotiri in the volcanic destruction layer of the Minoan Thera eruption.

“bones from domesticated animals (cattle, sheep, goats), found in the tsunami deposits at Palaikastro, tend to be a few years older than seeds from annual plants, found at Akrotiri in the volcanic destruction layer of the Minoan Thera eruption.”

Such a minimal block of time, which includes the Second Intermediate Period, can only be accommodated by a high chronology for the Middle Kingdom and a low chronology for the New Kingdom.

“Such a minimal block of time, which includes the Second Intermediate Period, can only be accommodated by “a high chronology for the Middle Kingdom (year 7 of Senusert III= 1872 or 1866) and a low chronology for the New Kingdom (year 1 of Ahmose = 1539)” [113, p. 241].”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The two oldest historical chronology options for year 22 of Ahmose, 1548 BCE [129] and 1558 BCE [88], are situated outside the calibrated age range of pure straw from the Ahmose mudbrick.

“The two oldest historical chronology options (Table 2), 1548 BCE [129] and 1558 BCE [88] are situated outside the above calibrated age range of pure straw from the Ahmose mudbrick.”

• cites [129] EF Wente, 1976, A Chronology of the New Kingdom.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [88] JH Breasted, 1909Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Two stick shabtis date clearly to the early 18th Dynasty (UC 40179 Tet-sa, and UC 40181 Teta-sa-antef).

“Two stick shabtis date clearly to the early 18th Dynasty (UC 40179 Tet-sa, and UC 40181 Teta-sa-antef).”

A high chronology for the Middle Kingdom is supported by radiocarbon dating of organic materials related to Senusert III.

“A high chronology for the Middle Kingdom is supported by radiocarbon dating of organic materials related to Senusert III [74,162,163].”

• cites [74] C Bronk Ramsey, 2010, Radiocarbon-based chronology for dynastic Egypt, Science sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [162] MW. Dee, 2013, A radiocarbon-based chronology for Middle Kingdom Egypt. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [163] SW Manning, 2014, High-precision dendro-14C dating of two cedar wood sequences from First Intermediate Period and Middle Kingdom Egypt and a small regional climate-related 14C divergence, Journal of Archaeological Science sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The pure straw fragment (GrA-64347) can be considered as "fresh" straw added at the time of production of the brick.

“The latter sample, which belongs to the largest plant fragments visible (Fig 5) at the surface of the mudbrick from the Temple of Ahmose at Abydos can be considered as “fresh” straw added at the time of production of the brick.”

Shabti UC 40181 may even date to the time of Hatshepsut/Thutmose III.

“The latter shabti (UC 40181) may even date to the time of Hatshepsut/Thutmose III (Table 2).”

Bennett calculated a minimum time interval of 315 years between year 7 of Senusert III (12th Dynasty) and year 1 of Nebpehtire Ahmose.

“He calculated a minimum time interval of 315 years between year 7 of Senusert III (12th Dynasty) and year 1 of Nebpehtire Ahmose.”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Whelan's broader age assessment including both the 17th and early 18th Dynasty is now confirmed by our radiocarbon dates.

“A detailed investigation by Whelan [95] of all 44 stick shabtis acquired by Petrie, kept in the Petrie Museum, led him to a broader age assessment, including both the 17th and early 18th Dynasty, which is now confirmed by our radiocarbon dates.”

• cites [95] P Whelan, 2007Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Bennett's low chronology for the beginning of the New Kingdom is supported by our investigation of the Ahmose mudbrick EA 32689, stamped with his throne name Nebpehtire, which provided the first ever radiocarbon measurements regarding his reign and the beginning of the 18th Dynasty.

“Bennett’s low chronology [113] for the beginning of the New Kingdom is supported by our investigation of the Ahmose mudbrick EA 32689, stamped with his throne name Nebpehtire (Fig 4), which provided the first ever radiocarbon measurements regarding his reign and the beginning of the 18th Dynasty.”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The calibrated radiocarbon results show that Petrie's age assessment was partly correct.

“The calibrated radiocarbon results show that Petrie’s age assessment [94] was partly correct.”

• cites [94] WMF Petrie, 1935Not checked — no full text of the source

Low chronology historical options for year 22 of Ahmose, 1502 BCE [89] and 1517 BCE [76], appear closest to the high probability peaks in the calibration graph of the pure straw fragment.

“Low chronology historical options for year 22 of Amose (Table 2), 1502 BCE [89] and 1517 BCE [76], appear closest to these high probability peaks in the calibration graph.”

• cites [89] R Krauss, 2009, The basis for the Egyptian dates. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [76] E Hornung, 2006 sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The δ13C values obtained from the six stick shabtis range from −26.2 to −29.3 ‰, indicating that the Ficus Sycomorus tree was used to produce the stick shabtis.

“The δ13C values we obtained range from −26.2 to −29.3 ‰ (Table 4 and 5), which indicate that the Ficus Sycomorus tree, widespread in Egypt, was used to produce the stick shabtis.”

This interval, which includes the Second Intermediate Period, represents a significant block of time that can only be accommodated, according to Bennett's conclusions, by a high chronology for the Middle Kingdom and a low chronology for the beginning of the New Kingdom.

“This interval, which includes the Second Intermediate Period, represents a significant block of time that can only be accommodated, according to Bennett’s conclusions [113], by a high chronology for the Middle Kingdom and a low chronology for the beginning of the New Kingdom.”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Radiocarbon dating confirms the suggested historical linkage that the dedicator Teti-(mes)u may be the same person as the Teti-mesu attested on figures in tomb TT15 of Tetiky.

“Thus, radiocarbon dating confirms the suggested historical linkage [95, p. 70, 73] that the dedicator Teti-(mes)u may be the same person as the Teti-mesu attested on figures in tomb TT15 of Tetiky [184].”

• cites [95] P Whelan, 2007Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [184] P Newberry, 1912, The Funerary Statuettes from the Tomb of Tetiky.Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The dedicator Teti-(mes)u on shabti UC 40179 is the same person as the Teti-mesu attested on figures in tomb TT15 of Tetiky.

Previous radiocarbon investigations regarding king Senusert III support a high Middle Kingdom chronology.

“Previous radiocarbon investigations regarding king Senusert III support a high Middle Kingdom chronology [43,162,163].”

• cites [43] C Bronk Ramsey, 2010, Radiocarbon-based chronology for dynastic Egypt, Science sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [162] MW. Dee, 2013, A radiocarbon-based chronology for Middle Kingdom Egypt. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [163] SW Manning, 2014, High-precision dendro-14C dating of two cedar wood sequences from First Intermediate Period and Middle Kingdom Egypt and a small regional climate-related 14C divergence, Journal of Archaeological Science sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Radiocarbon dating supports the unique historical chronology by Bennett [113], who calculated the minimum time distance between Senusert III (12th Dynasty) and the accession year of Nebpehtire Ahmose.

“Finally, radiocarbon dating supports the unique historical chronology by Bennett [113], who was able, based on his genealogical studies of the governors of El-Kab, to calculate the minimum time distance between Senusert III (12th Dynasty) and the accession year of Nebpehtire Ahmose.”

• cites [113] C Bennett, 2006, Genealogy and the chronology of the Second Intermediate Period, Egypt and the Levant sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The reign of Nebpehtire Ahmose and the beginning of the 18th Dynasty postdate the Minoan eruption.

“In conclusion, the reign of Nebpehtire Ahmose and the beginning of the 18th Dynasty postdate the Minoan eruption.”

Assessments relating the Ahmose Tempest Stela at Karnak (Thebes) and its description of severe rainstorms to the Minoan Thera eruption can now be considered incorrect.

“Assessments relating the Ahmose Tempest Stela at Karnak (Thebes) and its description of severe rainstorms to the Minoan Thera eruption can now be considered incorrect.”