21st February 2012, 02:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 21st February 2012, 10:14 PM by kevin wooldridge.)
Oxbeast Wrote:Come off it PP, you know what Jack means.
I just read an Anglo Saxon cemetery report, which had about 8 radiocarbon dates out of 300 graves. You'd look a bit silly in the report if you said, "we can only date 8 graves, and all these others which look quite similar and have grave goods must go down as an undated phase. We can't draw any inferences about burial practice changing over time because our sample is to small."
I agree and think that one of the advantages of using archaeological data obtained from stratigraphic excavation is that it is possible to interpolate dating ranges from a relatively small number of dated samples. Chronologies obtained in such a manner can be used as statistical underpinning for wider site and area interpretation....
....however a personal anecdote will illustrate the potential dangers of relying too much on typology. I was working on a project in the early 80s and we were visited by John Hurst (lovely guy, sadly missed). He came across to the structure I was excavating and rummaged amongst the collection of ceramics I had in my finds tray. 'What date do you think this ditch is?' he asked and I replied 'Probably no earlier than 11th century based on the finds '. 'Absolutely' he said 'What makes you think the pottery is 11th century? '....errrrr I read it in your book' I had to admit!!
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...