08-29-2003, 06:06 AM
Hi David,<br>
<br>
Thank you very much for all the information. Again, my apologies if I was a bit harsh last year (I fear it was me who asked all these questions, which may have prompted Linda). I must confess that I still feel a pang of regret when artefacts such as these, very intriguing as they are, can only be speculated about as they are retrieved from the soil by a 'Digger' and not an archaeologist. Not your fault that this 'Digger' is not able to date the objects.<br>
<br>
For instance, the armour, (I have already discussed this with Linda), we can't ever be sure now when it went into the soil. Was it Sarmatian? Even if you are correct and it was only the Sarmatians who gilded armour, we can't be sure if it was worn by a Sarmatian. It could have been Alanic, it could even have been worn by a Roman. Dating it would have made us a little more sure of that. What it can't do now, sadly, is provide an answer about Sarmatian presence in north Britain.<br>
<br>
Back to the topic at hand, the plumbatae. May I say they look very good? Surely a centrepiece of your collection? I'm glad that they are not tempered with, as you say, the world has seen too many fraudulent pieces already. But, if the weight is clay-with-addition, they are unique. Could there be lead in the clay (hence the name, 'plumbatae')? Aitor may be right about the oxidised lead. can you weigh them to find out? I'm sure there must be another plumbata around to check against.<br>
<br>
Anyway, many thanks for all the info.<br>
<br>
Valete,<br>
Valerius/Robert <p></p><i></i>
<br>
Thank you very much for all the information. Again, my apologies if I was a bit harsh last year (I fear it was me who asked all these questions, which may have prompted Linda). I must confess that I still feel a pang of regret when artefacts such as these, very intriguing as they are, can only be speculated about as they are retrieved from the soil by a 'Digger' and not an archaeologist. Not your fault that this 'Digger' is not able to date the objects.<br>
<br>
For instance, the armour, (I have already discussed this with Linda), we can't ever be sure now when it went into the soil. Was it Sarmatian? Even if you are correct and it was only the Sarmatians who gilded armour, we can't be sure if it was worn by a Sarmatian. It could have been Alanic, it could even have been worn by a Roman. Dating it would have made us a little more sure of that. What it can't do now, sadly, is provide an answer about Sarmatian presence in north Britain.<br>
<br>
Back to the topic at hand, the plumbatae. May I say they look very good? Surely a centrepiece of your collection? I'm glad that they are not tempered with, as you say, the world has seen too many fraudulent pieces already. But, if the weight is clay-with-addition, they are unique. Could there be lead in the clay (hence the name, 'plumbatae')? Aitor may be right about the oxidised lead. can you weigh them to find out? I'm sure there must be another plumbata around to check against.<br>
<br>
Anyway, many thanks for all the info.<br>
<br>
Valete,<br>
Valerius/Robert <p></p><i></i>
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)