Letter from the Subcommittee on the Near and Middle East to Schaeffer on a new dating method developed by Professor W. F. Libby and Dr J. R. ArnoldThe Subcommittee on the Near and Middle East

American Anthropological Association - Geological Society of America Subcommittee Near and Middle East - Committee on Carbon-14 c/o The Oriental Institute, The University of Chicago Chicago 37, Illinois, U.S.A.

[illegible]

Dear Colleague:

You may be aware that a dating method for the age determination of certain types of archaeological and geological material has been under development by Prof. W. F. Libby of the Institute of Nuclear Studies of the University of Chicago. The work of Dr. Libby and his colleague, Dr. J. R. Arnold was summarized in a paper published in Science (Vol. 109, 1949, pp. 227-28) but much progress has been made since that time, and the above mentioned Committee on Carbon-14 [illegible] of the Geological Society of America, to collaborate with Dr. Libby and Dr. Arnold in the dating of samples. It is in this way that the method, designed to measure the radioactivity of the carbon-14 in organic material, appears to be ideally suited. It is applied to the samples given below, not to samples older than 30,000 years, beginning towards 20,000 years ago.

Archaeologists in the Near and Middle East are anxious to provide solutions for the dating problems of their sites and to send pertinent material to the above address, unless specifically instructed otherwise.

[illegible]

[illegible]

In all parts of the world, there will be a great quantity of [illegible] samples but it will be necessary to assess priorities [illegible] the rough [illegible] [illegible] to the following points:

1. [illegible] should be limited to [illegible] [illegible] In [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]. Since the method concerns only materials less than 25,000 years, [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] the [illegible] possible to the [illegible]

2. [illegible] should have [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] to be [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] the [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]

3. The specimen should not have been treated or preserved with a chemical solution. If it has been, and you know the [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]

4. If there are any peculiar circumstances concerning the [illegible] of the sample, [illegible] your letter [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible] [illegible]

[illegible]