Steppe People in Alternative Calibrations

Chronology of wikipedian articles:

"core Yamnaya culture"

= Mikhaylivka I

c. 3600–3400 BC

Yamnaya culture

3300–2600

Corded Ware culture

c. 3000 BC – 2350 BC

Bell Beaker culture

(Central Western Europe)

2800-2300 BC

(Britain)

2450-1800 BC

Tajo: cultura arqueológica de Vila Nova de São Pedro

2900 al 2500 a. C.

On one carbon dated timeline:

Mikhaylivka I begins

3600 BC

Mikhaylivka I ends

3400 BC

Yamnaya begins

3300 BC

Corded ware begins

3000 BC

VN de SP begins

2900 BC

CW-E BB begins

2800 BC

Yamnaya ends

2600 BC

VN de SP ends

2500 BC

Br BB begins

2450 BC

Corded ware ends

2350 BC

CW-E BB ends

2300 BC

Br BB ends

1800 BC

It's superimposed on my current* tables:

1982 BC

80.546 pmC, dated as 3770 BC

1965 BC

Serug died

1959 BC

81.656 pmC, dated as 3634 BC

Mikhaylivka I begins

3600 BC

1957 BC

Nahor died

1936 BC

82.763 pmC, dated as 3500 BC

1930

Ishmael born

1916 BC

Isaac born.

83.166 pmC, dated as 3440 BC

Mikhaylivka I ends

3400 BC

1897 BC

83.568 pmC, dated as 3381 BC

1881 BC

Terah died

1877 BC

83.97 pmC, dated as 3321 BC

Yamnaya begins

3300 BC

1857 BC

84.371 pmC, dated as 3262 BC

1856 BC

Jacob and Esau born

1841 BC

Abraham died

1838 BC

84.77 pmC, dated as 3204 BC

1818 BC

85.169 pmC, dated as 3145 BC

1816 BC

Esau is 40, Jacob goes to Laban

1798 BC

85.566 pmC, dated as 3087 BC

1797 BC

Joseph born

1796 BC

Jacob leaves Laban

1793 BC

Ishmael died

1779 BC

85.963 pmC, dated as 3029 BC

Corded ware begins

3000 BC

1759 BC

86.359 pmC, dated as 2971 BC

1739 BC

86.754 pmC, dated as 2914 BC

VN de SP begins

2900 BC

1736 BC

Isaac died

1726 BC

Jacob came to Egypt.

1720 BC

87.148 pmC, dated as 2857 BC

1709 BC

Jacob died.

1700 BC

87.541 pmC, dated as 2800 BC

CW-E BB begins

2800 BC

1687

Joseph dies.

1678 BC

89.449 pmC, dated as 2600 BC

Yamnaya ends

2600 BC

VN de SP ends

2500 BC

Br BB begins

2450 BC

1656 BC

91.353 pmC, dated as 2404 BC

Corded ware ends

2350 BC

CW-E BB ends

2300 BC

1634 BC

93.251 pmC, dated as 2212 BC

1612 BC

95.145 pmC, dated as 2023 BC

1590 BC

97.033 pmC, dated as 1839 BC

Br BB ends

1800 BC

1574 BC

97.392 pmC, dated as 1793 BC

Superimposed on my proposal for improvement after initial interaction with Petrovich.**

1982 1882 BC

80.546 pmC, dated as 3770 BC

Mikhaylivka I begins

3600 BC

1830 BC

81.708 pmC, so dated 3500 BC.

Mikhaylivka I ends

3400 BC

Yamnaya begins

3300 BC

Corded ware begins

3000 BC

1724 BC

86.369 pmC, so dated 2935 BC.

VN de SP begins

2900 BC

CW-E BB begins

2800 BC

Yamnaya ends

2600 BC

VN de SP ends

2500 BC

Br BB begins

2450 BC

1618 BC

90.971 pmC, so dated 2400 BC

Corded ware ends

2350 BC

CW-E BB ends

2300 BC

1512 BC

95.515 pmC, so dated 1891 BC

Br BB ends

1800 BC

1459 BC

97.764 pmC, so dated 1646 BC

And on the one after the further*** interaction:

Mikhaylivka I begins

3600 BC

1870 BC

82.104 pmC, so dated as 3500 BC

Mikhaylivka I ends

3400 BC

Yamnaya begins

3300 BC

1831 BC

84.652 pmC, so dated as 3208 BC

Corded ware begins

3000 BC

1792 BC

87.187 pmC, so dated as 2925 BC

VN de SP begins

2900 BC

CW-E BB begins

2800 BC

1753 BC

89.71 pmC, so dated as 2651 BC

Yamnaya ends

2600 BC

VN de SP ends

2500 BC

Br BB begins

2450 BC

Corded ware ends

2350 BC

1714 BC

92.222 pmC, so dated as 2383 BC

CW-E BB ends

2300 BC

1675 BC

94.721 pmC, so dated as 2123 BC

1636 BC

97.562 pmC, so dated as 1840 BC

Br BB ends

1800 BC

1598 BC

97.703 pmC, so dated as 1790 BC

So, what would each of my recalibrations do to the duration of the process? From start of Mikhaylivka I to Bell Beakers ending in Britain.

Uniformitarian calibration: 3600 to 1800 BC, 1800 years.
My current: 1959 to 1574 BC, 385 years.
My first alternative proposal: c. 1860 to 1486 BC, 374 years.
My second alternative proposal: c. 1890 to 1598 BC, 292 years.

Only the spread part, now. From start of Mikhaylivka I to Bell Beakers beginning in Britain.

Uniformitarian calibration: 3600 to 2450 BC, 1150 years
My current: 1959 to 1656 BC, 303 years (less)
My first alternative proposal: c. 1860 to 1618 BC, 242 years
My second alternative proposal: c. 1890 to 1714 BC, 176 years

For the total span of cultures, 4.675, 4.813 or 6.164 times quicker. For the spread from Mikhaylivka to Britain, 3.795, 4.752 or 6.534 times quicker.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Benedict of Nursia
21.III.2026

In monte Cassino natalis sancti Benedicti Abbatis, qui in Occidente fere collapsam Monachorum disciplinam restituit ac mirifice propagavit; cujus vitam, virtutibus et miraculis gloriosam, beatus Gregorius Papa conscripsit.

PS. Notice, I said "Steppe People" and not "Indo-Europeans" ... I'm quite open to Indo-European being a Sprachbund, and I don't think the Steppe People were necessarily or even probably speakers of Indo-European./HGL

---

* Newer Tables, Flood to Joseph in Egypt, marginally table III—IV, all of table IV—V, Newer Tables, Joseph in Egypt to Fall of Troy, all of table V—VI, marginally table VI—VI/VII.

** Suppose I were Wrong on Chronological Matches Related to Egypt?

*** If I Got Douglas Petrovich Right, Sesostris III was Pharao when Joseph Received his Family

If I Got Douglas Petrovich Right, Sesostris III was Pharao when Joseph Received his Family

Suppose I were Wrong on Chronological Matches Related to Egypt? · If I Got Douglas Petrovich Right, Sesostris III was Pharao when Joseph Received his Family

He stated sth like Sesostris II for the pharao of the plentiful years and Sesostris III for that of the famine years.

Let's put Sesostris III instead of Djoser at (corresponding to) 1700 BC.

1510 + 215 = 1725 - 25 = 1700. 190 years.

Let's further put Exodus in 1446 BC, c. 200 years after the death of Joseph's pharao, alias on this view Sesostris III. Or 190 years. 1636.

1446 + 430 = 1876 BC. Genesis 14 is between 1876 and 1865, let's put it in 1870 BC.

1870 BC

82.104 pmC, so dated as 3500 BC (1)

1636 BC

97.562 pmC, so dated as 1840 BC (2)

1446 BC

100 pmC, dated as 1446 BC.

1870 to 1636 is 234 years. 1636 to 1446 is 190 years. The former can be neatly divided into 6 periods of 39 years. The latter into five periods of 38.

234 years makes for a decay to 97.209 %(3). Normal replacement is 2.791 pmC (4). Actual replacement is 17.396 pmC (5). This is 6.233 times faster than carbon 14 is produced today (6).
190 years makes for a decay to 97.728 % (7). Normal replacement is 2.272 pmC (8). Actual replacement is 4.654 pmC (9). This is 2.048 times faster than carbon 14 is produced today (10).
39 years makes for a decay to 99.529 % (11). Normal replacement is 0.471 pmC (12). 6.233 times that means an actual replacement of 2.934 pmC (13).
38 years makes for a decay to 99.541 % (14). Normal replacement is 0.459 pmC (15). 2.048 times that means an actual replacement of 0.939 pmC (16).
This we now insert into a model of the carbon 14 rise (17). And deduce the carbon years accordingly (18)

1870 BC

82.104 pmC, so dated as 3500 BC

1831 BC

84.652 pmC, so dated as 3208 BC

1792 BC

87.187 pmC, so dated as 2925 BC

1753 BC

89.71 pmC, so dated as 2651 BC

1714 BC

92.222 pmC, so dated as 2383 BC

1675 BC

94.721 pmC, so dated as 2123 BC

1636 BC

97.562 pmC, so dated as 1840 BC

The first table is quite OK.

1636 BC

97.562 pmC, so dated as 1840 BC

1598 BC

97.703 pmC, so dated as 1790 BC

1560 BC

98.194 pmC, so dated as 1711 BC

1522 BC

98.683 pmC, so dated as 1632 BC

1484 BC

99.17 pmC, so dated as 1553 BC

1446 BC

99.655 pmC, so dated as 1475 BC

The second table didn't work out quite well. Let's do it all over again.
100 - 99.655 = 0.345 pmC, divided by 5 is 0.069 pmC. Add that to the "actual replacement" value.

1636 BC

97.562 pmC, so dated as 1840 BC

1598 BC

98.123 pmC, so dated as 1755 BC

1560 BC

98.682 pmC, so dated as 1670 BC

1522 BC

99.238 pmC, so dated as 1585 BC

1484 BC

99.791 pmC, so dated as 1501 BC

1446 BC

100.342 pmC, so dated as 1418 BC

It seems to be hard to get this one right, doesn't it?

But am I even right in presuming exactly 100 pmC for 1446 BC?

High-Precision Decadal Calibration of the Radiocarbon Time Scale, AD 1950–6000 BC (19)
Minze Stuiver (a1) and Bernd Becker (a2)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/radiocarbon/article/highprecision-decadal-calibration-of-the-radiocarbon-time-scale-ad-19506000-bc/F1AB60097B0184501418D3EAEAD2EA90

Actually, when I look it up, 1440 BC has 3200 BP (or just a little older). The same is correct for 1450 BC. However, this is given in the Libby halflife, so, 3200 * 5730 / 5568 = 3293, 1950 AD - 3293 years = 1343 BC.

1446 BC should have a raw carbon date of 1343 BC (20=. I'm not going to do that table, however. Right now.

I think the point is clear, though. The dates could have more wiggles than shown in my here tables, indeed, for the second very probably should. But the dates cannot be replaced by more standard dates of Egyptology with Narmer in 3200 BC and so on.

Nor can one keep it indefinitely in a haze, like standard carbon dates from 1440 BC on, a set-off, as per Bietak, before that, but not precisely given how much.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Heribert of Cologne
16.III.2026

Coloniae Agrippinae sancti Heriberti Episcopi, sanctitate celebris.

PS, if I came to accept this position, I'd have to replace this: Newer Tables: Preliminaries · Flood to Joseph in Egypt · Joseph in Egypt to Fall of Troy.

(1) 3500 - 1870 = 1630, 0.5^(1630/5730) = 0.8210444795020451
(2) 1840 - 1636 = 204, 0.5^(204/5730) = 0.9756245087411058
(3) 0.5^(234/5730) = 0.9720903423121362
(4) 1 - 0.9720903423121362 = 0.0279096576878638
(5) 0.8210444795020451 * 0.9720903423121362 = 0.79812940913263271482117044974262
0.9720903423121362 - 0.79812940913263271482117044974262 = 0.17396093317950348517882955025738
(6) 0.17396093317950348517882955025738 / 0.0279096576878638 = 6.23300131893586196815659829017975051
(7) 0.5^(190/5730) = 0.9772781807633073
(8) 1 - 0.9772781807633073 = 0.0227218192366927
(9) 0.9756245087411058 * 0.9772781807633073 = 0.95345654501060327699244386721234
1 - 0.95345654501060327699244386721234 = 0.04654345498939672300755613278766
(10) 0.04654345498939672300755613278766 / 0.0227218192366927 = 2.04840354130778693932270612201569411
(11) 0.5^(39/5730) = 0.9952933554500555
(12) 1 - 0.9952933554500555 = 0.0047066445499445
(13) 0.0047066445499445 * 6.23300131893586196815659829017975051 = 0.029336521687566354958775586549781150053146244346695
(14) 0.5^(38/5730) = 0.9954137614730688
(15) 1 - 0.9954137614730688 = 0.0045862385269312
(16) 0.0045862385269312 * 2.04840354130778693932270612201569411 = 0.009394467239848078262587230361261737044734296215232
(17) [prior carbon 14, in decimal fraction] * [decay in decimal fraction] + [actual replacement in decimal fraction] = [carbon 14 in decimal fraction]
(18) 5730 * log([carbon 14 in decimal fraction]) / log(0.5) + [BC real year] = [BC carbon year]
(19) Should be consulted in preference over my tables for as soon as 100 pmC are reached.
(20) Raw date as per Cambridge halflife, which is not the standard for giving uncalibrated dates.

Suppose I were Wrong on Chronological Matches Related to Egypt?

Suppose I were Wrong on Chronological Matches Related to Egypt? · If I Got Douglas Petrovich Right, Sesostris III was Pharao when Joseph Received his Family

What would a revised chronology look like?

Current matches, involving Djoser for Joseph's Pharao and so carbon dated 2800 BC (raw date, calibrated 2600 BC) = 1700 BC, Thirteenth dynasty Pharao of the Exodus, 1550 BC as carbon date for Jericho destroyed in 1470 BC.

One problem with the last is, as Douglas Petrovich mentions on Academia:

In sealed tombs at Jericho, Garstang discovered royal scarabs with cartouches of the following kings: Hatshepsut, Thutmose III, and Amenhotep III.

I check and find this article:

Jericho: The Latest Research – Part Three
Bible Archaeology Report | November 24, 2025 | Bryan Windle
https://biblearchaeologyreport.com/2025/11/24/jericho-the-latest-research-part-three/

Now, Douglas Petrovich has some other dating for Amenhotep III than dying in 1350, namely probably in 1372 and acceeding the throne in 1410 BC, this follows Pharaonic King-Lists, Annals, and Day-Books: A Contribution to the Study of the Egyptian Sense of History (Donald B. Redford)

This is compatible with an Exodus under Amenhotep II in 1446 BC.

1446 + 430 = 1876 BC for the vocation of Abraham, when he was 75. Genesis 14 was in between this date and when he was 86 at the birth of Ishmael. So, c. 1870 BC. It's still carbon dated to 3500 BC.

3500 - 1870 = 1630 extra years. 0.5^(1630/5730) = 0.8210444795..., so 82.104 pmC.

Or what about the LXX reading? Here is one with quite a few text emendations on Ellopos:

1 And it came to pass in the four hundred and fortieth year after the departure of the children of Israel out of Egypt, in the fourth year and second month of the reign of king Solomon over Israel, 1α that the king commanded that they should take great [and] costly stones for the foundation of the house, and hewn stones. 1β And the men of Solomon, and the men of Chiram hewed [the stones], and laid them [for a foundation]. 1γ In the fourth year he laid the foundation of the house of the Lord, in the month Ziu, [Niso (Rahlfs)]* even in the second month. 1δ In the eleventh year, in the month Baal, this [is] the eighth month, the house was completed according to all its plan, and according to all its arrangement.

This might put the temple in the 440th year after the Exodus, so the Exodus in 1406 BC. This fits better with conventional dates for the death of Amenhotep II.

1406 + 430 = 1836, so Genesis 14 in c. 1830 BC.

3500 - 1830 = 1670 extra years. 0.5^(1670/5730) = 0.817081..., so, 81.708 pmC.

1830 - 1406 = 424 years. Let's divide these into quarters of 106 years. But first, the checkup for the speed coefficient.

0.5^(424/5730) = 0.95000268... (decay to 95 %), meaning a replacement normally of 1 - 0.95000268... = 0.0499973... (4.99973 pmC units).
0.817081... * 0.95000268... = 0.776229...
1 - 0.776229... = 0.2237706...
0.2237706... / 0.0499973... = 4.47565... times faster.

And let's apply that speed coefficient to the quarters, first equally, for this post:

0.5^(106/5730) = 0.987259...
1 - 0.987259... = 0.01274...
0.01274... * 4.47565... = 0.0570232...

Gives a table of:

1830 BC

81.708 pmC, so dated 3500 BC.

1724 BC

86.369 pmC, so dated 2935 BC.

1618 BC

90.971 pmC, so dated 2400 BC

1512 BC

95.515 pmC, so dated 1891 BC

1406 BC

100 pmC, so dated 1406 BC.

Let's divide the last in the middle. 53 years before the Exodus, Moses was still at the Pharaonic court.

0.5^(53/5730) = 0.993609...
1 - 0.993609... = 0.0063908...
0.0063908... * 4.47565... = 0.0286...
0.955146... * 0.993609... + 0.0286... = 0.9776...
5730 * log(0.9776...) / log(0.5) + 1459 = 1646 BC

Gives a table closeup of:

1512 BC

95.515 pmC, so dated 1891 BC

1459 BC

97.764 pmC, so dated 1646 BC

1406 BC

100 pmC, so dated 1406 BC.

The immediate problem, which could be fixed by making earlier parts of the carbon build up faster and later parts slower is, Moses was arguably not living in the court of three different pharaos:

Salitis, Fifteenth Dynasty pharaoh of Egypt, r.  c. 1648–1628 BC
Djehuti, Sixteenth Dynasty pharaoh of Egypt, r.  c. 1650–1647 BC
Sobekhotep VIII, Sixteenth Dynasty pharaoh of Egypt, r.  c. 1647–1631 BC

1640s BC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1640s_BC

Or, another way to fix it is, if none or not all of these pharaos have their dates from carbon dating.

To put this in perspective. You may have a library that's carbon dated (for instance from wood shelves, or in the case of cuneiform tablets, from wool coverings). It contains a text that for some reason you date to the same year as the destruction (let's not get into why). It mentions a ruler 120 years earlier.

Now, the library gets a date "2000 BC" because of carbon dates. But the ruler gets "2120 BC" not because of a carbon date, but because of being 120 years prior to sth dated to "2000 BC". In the latter case, ideally I don't look up my tables for 2120 BC, but only my tables for 2000 BC, and then add 120 years. Let's see how this works out in relation to my so far tables.* This one goes from the death of Joseph's Pharao Djoser to the death of Sesostris III who died when Moses was a toddler, which were so far my matches in Egyptology:

1634 BC

93.251 pmC, dated as 2212 BC

1612 BC

95.145 pmC, dated as 2023 BC

1590 BC

97.033 pmC, dated as 1839 BC

(1612 + 1612 + 1612 + 1612 + 1612 + 1612 + 1590) / 7 = 1608.857...
(95.145 + 95.145 + 95.145 + 95.145 + 95.145 + 95.145 + 97.033) / 7 = 95.415

5730 * log(0.95415) / log(0.5) + 1608.857... = 1996.8717....

Close enough. So, real date for the library from "2000 BC" would be 1609 BC. Now, in that case, the real date for the "2120 BC" ruler would be 1729 BC. It would be a mistake to instead try to take averages between 1634 and 1612 and their atmospheric pmC values. That would put the older ruler too recently.

In this case, I'm not sure if I would want the limit between 15th and 16th dynasty to before Moses was born or after he left Egypt for Madian after slaying the Egyptian overseer.

So, taking the scarabs of Jericho into account is somewhat of a headache, I'd need time, but ideally also collaborators I don't have now to do a good job. Thank you, Dr. Petrovich.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. Frances of Rome
9.III.2026

Romae sanctae Franciscae Viduae, nobilitate generis, vitae sanctitate et miraculorum dono celebris.

---

* Creation vs. Evolution: Newer Tables, Joseph in Egypt to Fall of Troy (table V—VI)
mardi 24 décembre 2024 | Publié par Hans Georg Lundahl à 11:00
https://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2024/12/newer-tables-joseph-in-egypt-to-fall-of.html

Checked Since Yesterday

Sobekemhat instead of Imhotep? Sesostris III instead of Djoser? · Checked Since Yesterday

If V in my tables* (Joseph in Egypt, given at its most recent as 1700 BC), is instead of Djoser Sesostris III, we get:

1935 BC (Genesis 14), dated as 3500 BC, 1565 extra years divide into 1432 and 133 years** for which the fractions of 1 mC (1 modern Carbon) multiply to 0.82736 (which = 82.736 pmC).

235 years later we have 1700 dated as 1838, 138 is not far from 133 (0.9839).

230 years later than that we have 1470, Joshua taking Jericho, 80 extra years, which I approximated as 90, giving the ratio 0.98924.

Between 223 and 268 we would have with ultra short term 223 + 22 = 255, and between that and 223 we have 234. 223 has ratio 0.97331, 22 has ratio 0.9973, multiply and then use mean between that and 0.97331, gives 0.972996.

The carbon present in 1935 BC would have been 0.82736, multiply with 0.972996 and you get 0.80502 * mC. This is what would have been left with no replacement, but we get in actual fact (in this hypothesis) 0.9839.

0.9839 - 0.80502 = 0.17888

Normal replacement is 1 - 0.972996 = 0.027004.

0.17888 / 0.027004 = faster production factor of 6.624.

Between this V and VII we get no VI, and in 230 years the faster production factor is 1.18.

On the pure carbon side, not much to worry about. It is perfectly acceptable, and more regular than my own version.

My beef with this is, I want the Exodus prior to the Hyksos invasion. If Sesostris III was Joseph's Pharao rather than the child killer of Exodus 1, there is too little Egyptian history to account for the 215 years between Jacob settling in Egypt and the Exodus. Usually, there is too much.

Also, I think the tombs of Djoser and Sesostris III were preserved to carbon dating by God's providence. I wondered if Imhotep could have been the Philistine king of Gerara who made inquiries about Rebecca, but I looked up, nope, Abimelech doesn't sound the least like Imhotep. (Neither does Joseph, but making Imhotep Joseph agrees with Egyptian legend and makes the preservation of Djoser's tomb explicable by Providence).

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Alexius
17.VII.2020

* I make tables between certain pinpoints of Biblical history with matches in archaeology, from I, Flood to IX, Temple of Solomon.

** see the tables on this post:

New blog on the kid : Calculé sans le logiciel, pour carbone 14
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2020/06/calcule-sans-le-logiciel-pour-carbone-14.html

Sobekemhat instead of Imhotep? Sesostris III instead of Djoser?

Sobekemhat instead of Imhotep? Sesostris III instead of Djoser? · Checked Since Yesterday

Off the bat, while listening to Douglas Petrovich, this sounds like a strain on carbon buildup between Genesis 14 and Joseph in Egypt, plus a very stable carbon level from Joseph in Egypt to Exodus.

I prefer the idea that Sesostris III was the child killer, Amenemhat III the Pharao whose daughter picked up Moses, and Amenemhat IV* (who has no full grave but a cenotaph) was Moses. That is the hypothesis on which I model the carbon build up. I may try a modelling on this one later, tonight I am short of time.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Our Lady of Mount Carmel
16.VII.2020

* Credits to David Down, this article:
Searching for Moses
by David Down | This article is from
Journal of Creation 15(1):53–57, April 2001
https://creation.com/searching-for-moses