22nd February 2012, 02:45 PM
P Prentice Wrote:wearin perfum de bodger today jack
i dont disagree with the benefits of ams dating and i also agree with your assertion that the 3 age system is floored beyond repair - but
typology has a part to play still - for instance - imagine a scenario where a context contains only a b&t arrowhead, a grotty bit of beaker and a hazel nutshell that returns a date of say 3000. would you say you had the earliest beaker in Britain?
:face-approve: Now we're getting to the crux.
Of course not..............as any archaeologist worth their salt would instantly ask...
'Just one hazelnut shell, that could be residual/intrusive? Was it abraded? Where were the artefacts/ecofacts, in the same context? How was that context formed? etc etc etc.'
Before jumping to such a conclusion.
Not to mention checking the measured chronologies for your bit of pot and arrowhead. Gather all the info together and critically assess the most likely suite of interpretations.
But far better to look for carbonised residue on the pot and/or TL date the pot directly.
Such an arrangement of objects presents a fascinating set of questions to pursue.............never assume anything, question everything.
With the given information, there is no reason why any of those objects are contemporary. Even if they are from the same 'context'.