Comments on: Radiocarbon (carbon-14) Dating of Book of the Dead of Sobekmose

By: Dr Munro, Irmtraut

Dr Munro, Irmtraut — Sun, 10 Apr 2011 14:32:46 +0000

Dear Mrs Danzig,
I have been for years responsible in the Book of the Dead project in Bonn and have worked in my PhE thesis about the dating of BD (Untersuchungen zu den Totenbuch-Papyri der 18. Dynastie, London/New York 1987). By then I had never seen the manuscript of Sebekmose. Now looking at the script and the bit of the vignette it is clear for me, that the manuscript is of a earlier date than you have presumed. 1420 BC would be in the time of Amenhotep II, which is according to the hieratic script and the direction of the text impossible. Maybe you could send me some other images of the papyrus. This would enable me to give more detailed criteria for its dating.
Best wishes
Irmtraut Munro

By: Rachel

Rachel — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 15:33:52 +0000

Dear Kevin,
Thank you for your comments on our blog on C-14 dating of papyrus. To answer your question, according to our curators, precise dating within the field of Egyptology is rarely attainable, and indeed, an exact date of 1420 B.C.E. would not be perfect according to our spectra or knowledge, which is why the date of 1420 B.C.E. is given as approximate. Our curators believe this to be a fairly accurate date, but more broadly, they believe our papyrus dates from the early to mid-18th Dynasty. Adding to the confusion unfortunately is that the interpretation of radiocarbon dating is subject to many complex problems. That date, whether it’s c. 1420 B.C.E. or c. 1430 B.C.E or earlier, is based on a combination of the scientific and historic information we have at hand. Thank you very much for your comment.

By: Rachel

Rachel — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 15:30:50 +0000

Dear Mr. Kidd,

Thank you for your response to our blog on C-14 dating of papyrus and for pointing out that a material does not have to be 2,000 years old to be eligible for this testing; I misread this somewhere and appreciate you catching that. As far as the use of calibration curves, I refer you to our testing facility at the University of Arizona, http://www.physics.arizona.edu/as. They should be able to tell you why they used what they did. We did not run the test ourselves. Many thanks again for your comment.

By: oliverherold

oliverherold — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 21:42:31 +0000

http://j.mp/hR3HOY Radiocarbon (carbon-14) Dating of Book of the Dead of Sobekmose

By: drjohnwardkt

drjohnwardkt — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 07:30:39 +0000

Brooklyn Museum: » Radiocarbon (carbon-14) Dating of Book of the Dead of Sobekmose http://t.co/D9NPV25 via @brooklynmuseum

By: Kevin

Kevin — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 01:31:54 +0000

It’s hard to accept at face value the assertion that C14 dating validates the previous estimate of 1420 BCE, given that calBC 1420 falls outside the range of the 2 sigma bracket for this date, which implies that the correct age falls somewhere between calBC 1620 and calBC 1430 with a 95.4% probability. The probability that the date is calBC 1420 therefore falls in a zone of probability less than 5%. The intercept of this calibration curve places the most likely estimate of its age around 1500-1510 BC, as the zone of highest probability within the one-sigma curve (calBC 1540-1450) also implies. All still suggests 18th Dynasty, but in the interest of educating the public about the proper use of techniques like C14 dating, it would be appropriate for a museum to acknowledge that their dating results actually complicate the curator’s prior expectations and require further examination of their preconceptions, rather than suggesting fallaciously that the results confirm their earlier hypotheses when the data presented clearly do not.

By: Daily Dose of Archaeology 2.0 - Page 73 - Historum - History Forums

Daily Dose of Archaeology 2.0 - Page 73 - Historum - History Forums — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 23:49:30 +0000

[…] […]

By: Ray Kidd

Ray Kidd — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 16:22:33 +0000

Hi,

1. Why do you claim that “the material in question be at least 2,000 years old”?

2. Why do you use an outdated version of OxCal and calibration curve? The latest versions are :
OxCal V 4.1.7 Bronk Ramsey 2010. r5; atmospheric data from Reimer et al (2009). This does not alter the conclusions significantly, but using the latest cal curve is good form.

regards

Ray

By: Bennu

Bennu — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 20:29:37 +0000

Radiocarbon (carbon-14) Dating of Book of the Dead of Sobekmose @brooklynmuseum http://bit.ly/e82GbL #papyrus #bookofthedead