Carbon dating pottery validating couples
This question is sharpened in light of the fact that the uncertainty in the usual radiocarbon readings (plus or minus 25 years or so) may be as large as the difference in dates in the debate. Measuring the remaining carbon-14 content in “long-term” organic samples, such as wood, will provide the date of growth of the tree, rather than the date of the archaeological stratum in which the sample was found.
The results, depending on the calibration, can be quite different. Naturally, different statistical models for interpretation of the same data will produce different results. After processing the data with all these scientific tools, most archaeologists “improve” the given dates in accordance with broader archaeological and historical considerations.For all these reasons, contrasting dates have been reached in the ongoing chronological debate concerning the Iron Age.A decisive solution is far from being accomplished.The archaeological evidence is often not mentioned.Moreover, this archaeological evidence is not available and cannot be examined.
Search for carbon dating pottery:
Moreover, as so much emphasis is put on questions of different calibration methods and different statistical manipulations, sometimes the archaeological evidence is neglected and the data are not properly presented.