Leave a comment

Comments 30

endlessrarities February 12 2012, 10:49:24 UTC
I can't comment about fourth century stuff, but in the late bronze age, it was long assumed (and still is, I fear!) that the kinds of metalwork in circulation can be interpreted on the evidence from hoards. Hoards are assumed to be a representative sample of the material in circulation, as they're linked with the metalworking process, but if you then go beyond the assumption that they ARE a representative sample, and suggest that these hoards may in fact be selective, the entire coat is on a shoogly peg.

I would suspect the same situation is true in the 4th century context - the assumption is made from the material that has survived to the present. And, since metal objects can be endlessly recycled, it may well be true that this pattern is slewed and not at all representative.

Reply

bunn February 12 2012, 13:30:43 UTC
The writer I was reading is definitely making a lot of deductions from surviving material: I thought it seemed a bit dodgy!

Reply

endlessrarities February 12 2012, 15:43:47 UTC
It's amazing how these assumptions remain unquestioned even in the present...

Reply


Leave a comment

Up