Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 29 Apr 2011 12:27:08 +0100 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi all
I spend much of my life counting bits of pottery (sherd nos, wt, minimum
vessels and EVEs depending on site and money) etc but don't pretend
interpreting such figures is an exact science - its often very
intuitive. After decades of experience you tend to be aware that certain
pottery breaks into smaller or larger pieces and note that something
different is going on when it is say over small. However, it is useful
to know you have 20,00 thousand sherds of North Devon gravel tempered
sherds as opposed to 2. As i pointed out to a client and noticed that
the two sherds of 13th-14th century AD pot in their 8th century Radio-
carbon dated pit were 1g (and a notional one probably) and small enough
to go down a worm hole they needn't have panicked. What we excavate
anyone usually has little resemblance to what was used as examining
exceptional sites shows those that are waterlogged, calacareous, or just
have their middens in place or in the UK looking at the very different
material metal detectorists find to what we seen on sites. Various
people have worked on pot/ bone comparisons eg the late Alan Vince in UK
but mostly there is no time for such stuff in commercial archaeology.
paul
|
|
|