Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Roman Flagons
#11
Is the Catterick form series etc not that used in Wilson 2002? - have to admit I've never ventured into the CD with all that stuff on (which inconveniently seems to have become detached from the mongraph but is doubtless filed safely somewhere!) but I'm sure someone on here can find a copy
Reply
#12
For those who are just starting out in archaeology or who only have a casual interest in Roman pottery and don't want to dive straight into fabric and form series but just have a handy guide, then don't forget the little Shire books. They are so cheap that they can be used in the field or on muddy finds tables without causing any pangs. The academics may shriek about this recommendation but lots of 'real' archaeologists use Shire books for a quick ID before getting stuck into the meatier tomes. Smile
Reply
#13
What, and pre-empt the excitement of getting a report back from the expensive specialist? }Smile
Reply
#14
Dinosaur, you are a very funny man.

Specialists are not just for christmas... those nerdy microscopes, dry books and nice comfy chairs don't pay for themselves you know.Big Grin

On a serious note, it highlights the need for more specialists to get out there and talk to the field staff. A decent introduction to the principles and types of pottery, provided over time, should form part of a decent on-the-job training, and is even better if it can be related to a site you are or have recently worked on.:face-huh:
Reply
#15
I agree entirely, Gonetopot, but I was thinking more of the non-professional people who find it difficult to get information on finds. I've had dealings with a few groups in the past, and some individuals, who were interested in finds but were horrified at the cost of the specialist books. Some only wanted to know how to tell Roman from medieval from Tudor at a very basic level. I think everyone's interest in archaeology and finds should be encouraged. (That includes teaching professionals too, of course) Smile
Reply
#16
Hello--may I point out that it is not a Hofheim type, but a ring-neck flagon. By the thickness of the rings and their upright form, it is first-century, early second. Without a close peer at the fabric, it could be one of many kilns with access to iron-free clays. I rather like the bowl with it, most peculiar form and decoration, onlything similar I have seen printed is from the fortress at Usk. where was yours found, please?
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Roman Cremation weights BAJR 11 5,609 17th December 2014, 07:57 PM
Last Post: Dinosaur
  Oriens Roman burial - did she eat mince pies? BAJR 3 2,067 3rd January 2014, 02:33 PM
Last Post: P Prentice
  Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference - Bursaries BAJR 1 1,289 11th February 2013, 04:19 PM
Last Post: BAJR
  Call for more time on Flintshire Roman dig BAJR 7 3,136 9th February 2013, 03:47 PM
Last Post: Dinosaur
  Roman Wall painting specialist looking for... Alvaro Cánovas Ubera 19 6,886 2nd January 2013, 11:26 AM
Last Post: Alvaro Cánovas Ubera
  Metal detectorist to auction Roman helmet ex-archaeologist 149 37,919 24th January 2012, 02:17 PM
Last Post: Bigpicture
  Roman DNA project gives voice to the silent majority BAJR 1 1,200 18th November 2011, 09:42 AM
Last Post: BAJR
  Housing next to Southwell Roman settlement site rejected BAJR 8 2,566 15th November 2011, 01:13 PM
Last Post: Wax
  The Millet-Eaters of the Roman Empire BAJR 12 3,939 13th October 2011, 06:54 PM
Last Post: Dinosaur
  What is Roman post period 9? sira19730 6 2,474 7th July 2011, 04:06 PM
Last Post: gonetopot

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)