At https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2313361120 .. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2313361120 … we have an interesting research paper. The authors describe geomagnetic excursions as ‘geomagnetic variations’ which is presumably the same thing. However, the idea is not to understand the variations, or quite what was going on, as in research on excursions, but to catalogue the variations for a specific purpose – to create another dating methodology. Quite apart from recognising there is a problem with the current crop of dating methods, we may note. Why else would a new dating method be required? Is the calibration model [tree rings and C14] throwing up inconsistencies. Well, archaeologists it would seem, have a problem as far as the first millennium BC is concerned. There is also a problem with the so called Greek dark age. What is chronologically right for Egypt is not specifically right for its neighbours, near and far.
The research covers the period from the 3rd to the 1st millenniums BC. The research specifically makes use of fired bricks from Iraqi archaeological excavations. They used a new technique to get around heating up bricks and pottery which often resulted in wiping out the ancient geomagnetic signature baked into the brick or pottery at the time of firing. The ancient signature is what they required, in order to make it useful as a dating method. Some 32 bricks were used in the research – dating to the reigns of 12 kings. The results confirm high field value during the first millennium BC, backing up data from the southern Levant. The authors hope to produce an archaeomagnetic analysis that will prescribe a dating technique for archaeologists – providing more accuracy to current dating. Will it find a discrepancy associated with the calibration curve?
Paleomagnetic research aims to reconctruct the direction and intensity of the geomagnetic field over time, most commonly by the examination of thermoremanent magnetisation recorded in iron oxide minerals in materials when they are heated to high temperatures and then cooled in a magnetic field. Firing of pottery and bricks, it has been known for a long time, preserves a magnetic signature from the point of firing. It has the potential to accurately and precisely date such materials. The same technique, at some point in the future, may be used during excavations of ancient sites that were destroyed by great heat – whether by human conquest or heavenly events. For instance, it could provide an exact date for the fiery destruction of Tall el-Hammam, the so called Biblical city of Sodom. It might also have a role to play in the ruins of Ugarit at Ras Shamra, or the burnt remains of the Hittite city of Hattusas. There is great potential in this methodology.
Archaeomagnetic samples are often plagued by chronological uncertainty, we are told. Sometimes in the range of hundreds of years. They hope to create a library of dates in the Middle East in order to compliment Israeli research in the Levant. It concerns the Iron Age and has created what is called a Levantine archaeomagnetic curve – which seems to compliment the C14/tree ring calibration curve. Have they found actual evidence of axial dipole movement or are they simply cataloguing what the bricks are telling them – on the assumption the mainstream chronology framework, based on Egyptology, is basically correct – but might require some smallish adjustments.
The Levantine anomaly is dated loosely between 1050 and 550BC. From the end of the LB age to Ezekiel’s vision [almost certainly a reference to abnormal auroral phenomena]. They mention evidence of the event has been noted in what is modern Turkey [Anatolia], Georgia [Russian research], Bulgaria, Italy and Greece, Spain, the Canary Islands and the Azores, as well as China. For some reason they are loathe to include Russian data – even though this has been a theatre of research for them for decades. The West is catching up, it is hoped. The West lost their way when they rejected Nils Axel-Morner’s Gothenberg event, a geomagnetic excursion in the Late Pleistocene.
The hope of the researchers is they will create a method to compliment other methodologies such as dendrochronology and C14. On the other hand, it might open a can of worms.
See also https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/12/231218150931.htm … where we may note that in the time of Nebuchadnezzar II, the Earth’s magnetic field seemed to change quickly and dramatically over a short period of time. This was roughly at the time of Ezekiel’s Vision. For strong aurorae to be seen over Babylonia in the 6th century BC the magnetic poles may have moved not just by longitude but also by latitude. Lots of may be’s it would seem.