Archaeology question : interpreting archeological dates

[Theodosius the Great]

Avete Omnes,

I have a general question regarding the interpretation of dates assigned to artifacts by archaeologists.
Are dates always approximations of when artifacts were made or are they approximations of
how long they've been laying in the ground ?

Follow-up question : If they are approximations of when artifacts were made, how much leeway is reasonable when guessing when the artifact was in use either prior or after the assigned date ? Decades ? (give or take) In other words, what's the general margin of error ?

[size=85:2s0iek7m][Disclosure : The main reason I ask is because I'm wondering if the Sutton Hoo sword could be used for a mid-6th century impression even though it has been dated to the 630s AD)].[/size]

Thanks in advance.
~Theo

[Westr70]

I'm an archaeologist, although in California. None-the-less, the dating of artifacts usually is given as a range of time rather than a specific date. In my own area the range of dates for a given type of artifact can be thousands of years, since artifact types didn't change frequently. In State societies the time range can be tightened since there are many artifacts, particularly ceramics and coins, that can be found in association and help refine the date. Here comes the disclaimers....... On the other hand artifacts can be curated (kept) over long periods of time by their owners or even passed down through the generations and thus mess up nice neat dating. The associations of these artifacts usually give these items aways as anomolies and are disregarded as dates of use. It's rare to date an artifact to a specific year unless there is some type of documentation from that time period that states it was made in year so and so.

I hope this doesn't sound too much like a lecture and I HOPE it answers your question.

John

[Westr70]

Follow up answer to the sword question. Weapons tend to have long curation periods as they are valuable. How much time is anyones guess. I would suspect that in a formal army weapon uniformity would be enforced but in the Roman period you might be able to keep it for a generation or as long as you're in the army. That again depends on how often swords are changed in the army.

I should stick to my stone arrows........

:lol:

[Arahne]

For roman period there is no precise margin of error. It depends a lot on context of find. Also there are some products dated to a few decades. Some of them You can not date preciselly in century or two.

[Robert Vermaat]

I'm an archaeologist, although in California. John

Hi John, and welcome. Please add your real (first) name to your automated signature. It's a forum rule.

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Theo,

In other words, what's the general margin of error ?
[size=85:mib0zam1][Disclosure : The main reason I ask is because I'm wondering if the Sutton Hoo sword could be used for a mid-6th century impression even though it has been dated to the 630s AD)].[/size]

There isn't one. one margin, I mean. Roman coins turn up in modern Tunesia as method of payment. Other coins are disturbed by animals from their context and turn up in modern layers. Some archaeologists intertepreted the wear & tear of a stone surface as it being replaced every 6 years whereas other saw the same pavement being replaced every 20 years or so. Then there's a sword that might be ket hanging on the wall for generations, to end up in a much later funeral. I say it's possible. But: I am not n expert on swords, and looking at the style of it might probably tell you moe about thie possibility of it being older.

I'd love to read the articles of the future about dating the worlds' events from Coca-Cola bottles and their various styles...

[Theodosius the Great]

@ John :

Thanks, that does help answer my question.
BTW, welcome to RAT

@ Stefan and Robert :

I didn't consider that there were other factors when it comes to analyzing weapons.
This makes a lot of sense given the utility and sentimentality associated with them.

Thank you

~Theo

[Carlton Bach]

In general, the margin of error will depend on how the object in question was dated. For the Sutton Hoo sword, as was pointed out above, it is quite possible that the weapon is significantly older than the burial. What I would suggest is to compare how the sword fits in with other dated finds. It is equally plausible that a king would have a treasured heirloom or the latest in imported weaponry, but if you can find the style earlier, that makes it plausible the Sutton Hoo sword was not new at the time it was interred.

Generally it is frightening how tentative a lot of our dating is, BTW.

[Medicus matt]

Whilst it's possible that the blade of the Sutton Hoo sword might have been an antique at the time of deposition (re-hilting of older blades with more up to date stylish fittings being a fairly common practice in the medieval period), the hilt fittings are what 'date' the sword as it was buried.

That particular style of garnet and gold seen on the pommel cap is typical of the early 7th century and has parallells in a few scandinavian swords of the same period. The shape of the pommel itself is also typically early seventh century, as are other elements (such as the 'clips' found on the grip which are almost identical to the early 7th C lombardic sword found at Nocera Umbra).



For 6th C, you'd be better off with organic upper and lower guards and a simpler, flatter copper-alloy pommel-cap.

[Theodosius the Great]

Carlton, Matt :

That's a very helpful way to interpret dates, comparing the sword to earlier styles.
I've been sifting through the old Osprey book on the 'Germanic Warrior AD 236-568'
and thought I saw a hilt that looked somewhat similar to the Sutton Hoo sword.
The pommel was ornate like the latter's but I'm not sure what the drawing is based on.

For 6th C, you'd be better off with organic upper and lower guards and a simpler, flatter copper-alloy pommel-cap.

Thanks for the suggestion ! Would something like the drawing I made below be more suitable for mid-sixth century, Matt ?

I figured the pommel and guard would both have twin brass plates with faux ivory sandwiched in between. The pommel has an additional wooden cap. (I could use wood for the guards like you said, but I'm going for an officer impression.)

~Theo

[Epictetus]

Then there's a sword that might be ket hanging on the wall for generations, to end up in a much later funeral.

Ditto. Bietti-Sesteri points out that almost every single weapon used as grave goods in very early Latium was extremely old and no longer useful as a working weapon when it was buried. However, metal tools were much more rare at this time, of course.

[Medicus matt]

I've been sifting through the old Osprey book on the 'Germanic Warrior AD 236-568'
and thought I saw a hilt that looked somewhat similar to the Sutton Hoo sword.

Yeah well, older Osprey....'nuff said really. :wink:

Thanks for the suggestion ! Would something like the drawing I made below be more suitable for mid-sixth century, Matt ?
I figured the pommel and guard would both have twin brass plates with faux ivory sandwiched in between. The pommel has an additional wooden cap. (I could use wood for the guards like you said, but I'm going for an officer impression.)

Looks good. Ivory, horn, bone, wood...all possibilities for the 'meat' in the sandwich. However, I've found that the faux ivory stuff cracks up under impact...not a problem if it's not a 'combat' blade I suppose but not likely to bear up so well to the rigours of re-enactment combat. Copper alloy plates above and below on each guard ARE known but the more usual set up for early 6th C has a metal plate on the lower face of each gaurd only.. but then if you're going for higher status then damn the expense and have two. However, if that is the case, I'd also recommend a metal pommel cap. There are plenty of finds of swords where there was a metal pommel cap and wholly organic guards with no metal plates but I can't think of any where you have the metal plates and no metal pommel cap. Wood doesn't really make much sense.

Here's a pic of a nice 6th C hilt from Binnsy (who's currently making my new 5th C sword)

[attachment=2:120qh8bt]<!-- ia2 Sword_8_hilt.jpg<!-- ia2 [/attachment:120qh8bt]

And a couple of examples:-


[attachment=1:120qh8bt]<!-- ia1 abeh4coll5.jpg<!-- ia1 [/attachment:120qh8bt]

[attachment=0:120qh8bt]<!-- ia0 chessell.jpg<!-- ia0 [/attachment:120qh8bt]

[Medicus matt]

Hmmmm....I'll have another go with the second one.

[attachment=1:2d2iu86g]<!-- ia1 chessell1.jpg<!-- ia1 [/attachment:2d2iu86g]

[attachment=0:2d2iu86g]<!-- ia0 chessell.jpg<!-- ia0 [/attachment:2d2iu86g]

[Theodosius the Great]

Thanks for all the photos, Matt

The repro looks very pricey :o
I hope you post a pic of your new sword when you get it.

Looks good. Ivory, horn, bone, wood...all possibilities for the 'meat' in the sandwich. However, I've found that the faux ivory stuff cracks up under impact...not a problem if it's not a 'combat' blade I suppose but not likely to bear up so well to the rigours of re-enactment combat.

That's good to know. I'll consider those alternatives. Although mine will be a show piece since the blade is MUCH too heavy for combat simulation. I'm modifying a 'Frankish' sword (and scabbard) made by Deepeeka.

but the more usual set up for early 6th C has a metal plate on the lower face of each gaurd only.. but then if you're going for higher status then damn the expense and have two.

My time frame will be 535-580 for a Byzantine officer. I've just ordered some pre-fabricated plates for the guards which costs a couple of dollars. They may be too thin but we'll see. I wonder what I'll use for rivets.

However, if that is the case, I'd also recommend a metal pommel cap.

You're quite right, a wooden cap is inconsistent. I picked wood since I can't make a metal cap myself. But I have an idea, I can carve one out from the brass pommel on my Frankish sword using a dremel cutting wheel and filer. It may look very good...hmm..

Thanks for your help, Matt
It's hard to get advice for these issues since so few people are interested in this period.

~Theo
________________________________________________________
P.S.
Sorry for this digression from the thread's main focus.
________________________________________________________

[Medicus matt]

The repro looks very pricey :o

Not too bad, about £1700 which, considering the quality of the pattern welding, is pretty good. The same sword but with a spring steel blunt 'combat' blade would be about £300 I think.

I wonder what I'll use for rivets.

Well...rivets probably...My local non-ferrous dealer stocks dome headed brass and copper rivets with 1" long shanks. That's what I use, that or I make my own using brass rod.

Thanks for your help, Matt
It's hard to get advice for these issues since so few people are interested in this period.

No worries, 5th/6th C European is my personal favourite period when it comes to history and archaeology. It's a period in which interest is growing in the UK. My old group, ERA, used to concentrate on it and there are at least three new groups that have sprung up in the last couple of years. Not so much interest in Eastern equipment of the same period here though so it's good to know that someone's having a go.