I found that dating with any one type of artifact did not work too well for
me. I was trying to work out a reliable method of dating very short
chronological layers so I could apply Frontier Theory to a frontier that
passed within thirty years. So I wanted ten year segments or there abouts.

I ended up modifying the application of South's Mean Ceramic formula to
apply to all dateable artifacts from my site. The method works well for ca
1860 onwards, I have not have a lot of opportunity to apply it to earlier
sites. I wrote up the early work but the paper does not include
consideration of things which blur the results. I found these to be

Intrusive artifacts. Some thing I found worked their way down my sand matrix
Small sample size.
and of course artifacts with uncertain dating or very long time ranges which
were excluded from the dating exercise. Nails were excluded from the general
dating of the chronological layers because they can drop out of a structure
at a much later date then the construction date but I have used them to help
date when buildings were constructed or modified.

The reference to the paper is:

Nayton, G. 1992a "Applying Frontier Theory to a Western Australian site. The
problem of chronological control." The Australasian Journal of Historical
Archaeology.10: 75-82
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay and Beth Stottman" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, 27 January 2003 5:44 AM
Subject: Re: Fun with Window Glass


> I agree, too much emphasis has been placed on deriving dates from window
> glass analysis.  Don't get me wrong I still take the time to measure each
> window glass shard.  I don't use it much for dating.  However, for early
> sites I would try it, but I have not worked on many of those lately.
>
> I think analyzing color and thickness to look at window replacement
episodes
> or building construction or demolition episodes very useful.  I recently
> excavated a site where I am eager to compare archaeological samples to
> samples collected from windows in the standing structure on the site.  I
> have also had great success at looking at window glass distributions
> spatially to locate window locations on a building.  We actually
> reconstructed a building with window location based on the archaeology.
>
> M. Jay Stottman
> Kentucky Archaeological Survey
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Moyer" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 11:09 PM
> Subject: Fun with Window Glass
>
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > While window glass dating has had some serious
> > obstacles, it has proven itself extremely helpful
> > dating structural remains and distinguishing building
> > episodes. I think window glass is great for dating
> > structures but lacking when it comes to dating sites
> > or a span of occupation. As for ommitting them from
> > the artifact analysis, I find it worthwhile if just a
> > little tedious as long as there's an adequate sample.
> > Gotta keep looking at the details. I find Roenke's
> > formula to work well on late 19th century sites
> > throughout the US. I also like Ball's study if simply
> > because he includes color as a temporal variable, an
> > attribute I'm not fully ready to give up on just yet
> > and which the other studies tend to ignore. Also
> > heavily used in the midwest is Moir's work and
> > Christopher Shoen's thesis and article. The specific
> > citations can be found on my flat glass bibliography
> > at:
> >
> >  http://www.digitalpresence.com/histarch/glass.html
> >
> > What has been sorely needed is more window glass
> > patterning studies as opposed to simply aggregate
> > dating. Do other folks out their weigh their window
> > glass, and if so, how does it relate to the
> > fenestration of a building? While front facades
> > typically have greater fenestration (ie, more windows
> > per sqft) than the rear facades, back yard deposits
> > usually have more window glass, reflecting both
> > disposal patterns and differing breakage rates.
> >
> > On an interpretive level, I suspect that the
> > examination of window glass exclusively as an
> > "architectural artifact" is somewhat misleading and
> > devalues the role windows play in the lighting of our
> > homes, shops, businesses, etc.. Has anyone tried
> > comparing the ratio of window glass to lamp glass?
> > Might prove interesting in certain contexts. Also a
> > fun way to spice up that "Lighting" functional
> > artifact category nobody seems to want to talk about.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > ---------
> > David Moyer, RPA
> > Birchwood Archaeological Services
> > 70 East Masonville Pond Road
> > Sidney Center, NY 13839
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> > http://mailplus.yahoo.com