HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-transfer-encoding:
7BIT
Sender:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Robert Spool <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:11:43 +0000
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
> The moral to the story, for historical archaeologists, is that one can
> learn the MANUFACTURE date, but not how long an individual artifact
> gathered dust before it was sold, how long it was used, and how long it
> sat around before it was discarded.
>
> My own research indicates that any site dated using ceramic manufacturing
> dates ends up being attributed in the literature some 20-30 years earlier
> than it actually was occupied.
 
 
This example isn't exactly Historical Archaeology, but makes a
similar point.
 
Years ago I read about the excavation of a Roman villa in Spain.
Among its possessions was a bust of an Iberian priestess influenced
in style by Greek Classical design.  It clearly was not
contemporaneous with the villa as it was obviously carved centuries
before the Romans entered Spain.  How it came to rest there is a
mystery.
 
 
Robert Spool

ATOM RSS1 RSS2