A Test of Time and A Test of Time Revisited: The Volcano of Thera and the Chronology and History of the Aegean and East Mediterranean in the Mid-Second Millennium BC

Abstract

This volume is a compilation of two books. Part 1 is a reprint of the long out-of-print 1999 edition: A Test of Time: The Volcano of Thera and the Chronology and History of the Aegean and East Mediterranean in the Mid-Second Millennium BC (Oxford: Oxbow). Part 2 comprises A Test of Time Revisited, an extensively updated essay on the Thera/Santorini debate over 13 years later.A veritable hotbed of debate was generated by Manning's first contribution to Aegean chronology, which also had huge implications for the study of world history more generally. His original A Test of Time provided an extraordinarily detailed presentation of many primary sources of archaeological, art historical, and scientific data. A daring attempt was made to integrate these data to help shed more light on the absolute dating of the famous volcanic eruption at Thera. Manning prefaces that book as “a guide to where the debate is going” (A Test of Time, p. xxxi). Considering the more radical data and challenges a revision of both absolute and relative chronology posed to the Aegean and potentially wider Mediterranean region, including Egypt and Mesopotamia, it is not surprising that Manning's proposed high date of a ± 100-year difference to the traditional low date was received with mixed reactions. In response to those, Manning continued his research and posted his replies online. Those responses ultimately ended up becoming A Test of Time Revisited. This publication includes the more recent data, analyses, and research that Manning continued to conduct over 13 years after the original publication.The initial problem Manning tackled was the need to bridge the approximately 100-year chronological difference between the archaeological (ca. 1550–1500 BC) and scientific (ca. 1628 to late seventeenth century BC) data for the Thera eruption. The initial research for both relative and absolute chronologies presented in the first book includes a wide spectrum of evidence from artifacts found in the depths of the sea at the Uluburun shipwreck to the date of volcanic glass in ice core samples from Greenland. Manning conducted research all around the world, indicative of his dedication to include results using the most innovative dating techniques to create a more accurate chronology for this region. Some of the more significant archaeological data to be discussed in relation to this include the Egyptian frescoes from Tell el-Dab‘a with already-proposed Aegean chronologies and the appearance of Late Cypriot White Slip I pottery on Thera and in Egypt. On the other hand, the results of radiocarbon dating, ice core samples, and dendrochronology indicated climate change—possibly due to the volcanic eruption—in support of a high date of around 1628 BC. Manning elected to analyze all the data within the framework of the traditional tripartite system of High, Middle, and Low Chronologies. He does this in order to provide consistency and ease of transition across dating systems. He correctly notes that dating terminology can, however, be misappropriated and often does not span regional and era durations to include, for example, specific pottery styles and architecture. Reflecting on all the available data in conjunction with this tripartite dating system, A Test of Time Revisited continues to provoke the need for an extreme revision of traditional dating to make it accurately reflect real changes in the past, adapting conclusions to new chronological methods instead of being shaped to suit the already existing one.Strong argument has been made in both parts of the latest book for the need to synchronize chronologies throughout this region with a baseline agreement reached more from new scientific data rather than solely from conventional archaeological data. With a better synchronized chronology, more intricate insights about cultural interactions in the past can be derived. This, therefore, is indicative of the importance of ongoing research and analysis of the recent evidence presented in A Test of Time Revisited. It adds a wealth of new information to the debate derived from updated radiocarbon dating techniques, based on stronger correlated statistical (Bayesian) probabilities that have also been aligned with archaeological data. A presentation of the most significant data and analyses, available in Section 3 of A Test of Time Revisited, adds credence to the scholarship in the latest book. Scientific data, such as updated radiocarbon techniques and archaeomagnetic analyses of the tephra, along with correlations of the archaeological record, are provided for a more comprehensive response to criticisms of A Test of Time. Manning provides a transparent acknowledgment of possible sources of bias, while the reader is presented with well-supported arguments in A Test of Time Revisited, reflective of the detailed level of analysis also present in A Test of Time. With the added benefit of more time to draw on wider scholarship from both archaeological and scientific sources, A Test of Time Revisited builds upon A Test of Time and strengthens the argument for the need to resolve this dating debate. He uses the criticism of A Test of Time as a catalyst for strengthening the discussion in A Test of Time Revisited.Improved scientific dating methods from all available data sources are increasing in significance and support the need to keep forging ahead with such research. For example, Manning notes the now accepted revision of long-standing dates previously held for Gordion (A Test of Time Revisited, p. 16). However, the approximate 100 year difference of the absolute date of the eruption still remains the core challenge of the Thera debate. Radiocarbon dating of organic residue from Thera (in one instance, an olive branch) brought anything but peace to the debate. With disputed results due to possible contamination from the eruption to the lack of an outer bark to use for adequate analysis, critics were quick to reject the purported evidence provided by such scientific analysis of this branch. Yet, Manning does convincingly demonstrate the increased consistency in scientific results and provides many figures and tables to support the evidence for a now revised date of around 1640 BC. His argument emphasizes the need for a paradigm shift to re-interpret the archaeological material and to align it with this more scientifically derived high date. Manning convincingly shows the lack of adequate archaeological evidence (e.g., a questionable group of three bowls of Egyptian origin at the site), on which the conventional low date is based. Nonetheless, traditional proponents of the 1500 BC date, led by Manfred Bietak, still stand their ground and question the validity of scientific evidence as opposed to their interpretation based on an archaeological chronology.Manning's main argument against the conventional dating results is that the high date is more likely because it is based on more cutting-edge data and analyses, as outlined in A Test of Time Revisited. This additional essay was much needed, given the latest developments in technologies and also to address disputes and discussion generated by many other scholars in the intervening years. Most notable are the criticisms provided by Bietak's (2004) renowned response to the first book, specifically about how well artifacts have been related in sequence with Low Chronology dates. Most of these are addressed thoroughly by Manning in Section 4 of A Test of Time Revisited. The new book also responds to some of the other major critiques of his original book. What better way to do this than provide the original text along with updated responses to recent developments? Manning does note that these criticisms were valuable in forcing him to review the data even though A Test of Time Revisited cannot address all of them.This two-book edition provides a rich source of reference material that is useful for investigating a number of themes related to this controversy. However, the volume of data provided by both books—494 pages in A Test of Time and 201 in A Test of Time Revisited—cannot be easily digested in one sitting but are more palatable as chunks of indexed information. That is where the extensive index to the parts helps facilitate better access to topics that may be of particular interest to individual readers. When used as a reference book, these provision both data and analyses that can inform the reader about particular aspects of this great debate. The scope and magnitude of the data presented across these two books lends them to being better implemented as a searchable database in order to better draw links between data that could lead to a revision of the current chronological system for this region.As with the first book, this new edition is bound to generate significant debate, which in time may lead to consensus on dating of this decisive eruption. Until then, Manning has once again provided a rich source of material that will impact the application of both absolute and relative chronologies in the Mediterranean region.