Dating Roman Artifacts: Seeking Expert Advice

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tsu
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the methods used to date Roman pottery artifacts, particularly focusing on techniques such as stylistic comparison and thermoluminescence dating. Participants explore various approaches to dating artifacts, including both traditional and modern methods.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the dating methods used for Roman pottery artifacts, referencing a program they watched.
  • Another participant suggests that archaeologists typically date pottery by comparing its style and composition to known examples from the same period, noting this method is less expensive than radiometric dating.
  • A link is provided to an article on pottery dating, indicating that radioactive dating methods have become less expensive over time.
  • One participant mentions that pottery dating often involves analyzing style and composition, while bones can be carbon dated and wood is dated using dendrochronology.
  • A detailed explanation of thermoluminescence (TL) dating is provided, describing how it measures the time since the last heating event of the pottery and the process involved in analyzing emitted light.
  • Another participant reiterates the explanation of TL dating, emphasizing the process and its implications for dating pottery artifacts.
  • Concerns are raised about the destructive nature of TL dating, as the pottery often becomes brittle and may crumble after the process, alongside the need for comparative soil analysis.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various methods for dating pottery, with some agreeing on the effectiveness of TL dating while others highlight its drawbacks. The discussion does not reach a consensus on the best method, indicating multiple competing views remain.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the potential destruction of pottery during TL dating and the need for additional comparative analysis with soil, which may affect the reliability of the dating results.

Tsu
Gold Member
Messages
420
Reaction score
62
Is this forum the correct place for this question?

I recently saw a program on History Channel (or Science Channel - I'm not sure which one) where a man in England unearthed some pieces of pottery in his yard while building an addition to his home. I came in on the tail end of the program, so I missed HOW they determined the date of these artifacts. I did come to understand that they were Roman in origin, but I was wondering specifically how they dated these pottery items. Can someone help?

Thanks!
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
Just a guess, because I didn't see the program. But typically the easiest way for archaeologists to date pottery is to compare the style to known example from the same period. Type of clay used, design, decoration, etc. It's a lot easier and less expensive than radiometric dating.
 
http://www.bibarch.com/Concepts/Pottery&Dating.html on Pottery Dating. Radioactive dating isn't quite as expensive as it used to be either, so it's possible they did do that.
 
chemicalsuperfreak is correct, the program you watched
was almost certainly TIME TEAM, pottery is dated by
style and composition, bones are carbon dated ,wood
is dated by "dendrology" ,spelling? ring growth.
 
But the real and new trick for pottery dating is http://www.dal.ca/~digs/tl1.htm It's a complicated trick. But basically is possible to measure the time between two consecutive heating events of some minerals.

Minerals like clay in pottery, have the property of thermoluminescence (TL). What happens is that part of the energy from radioactive decay in the mineral is stored (electrons). When the material is heated that they glow like pottery that is heated in the stove. The amount of glowing tells something of the amount of trapped elektrons. The energy is released again and the electrons recombine with ions. This resets the radioactive counting clock. And during radioactive exposure, the trapped electrons start to build again.

For the TL-dating, the pottery sample is reheated again. The emited light is analysed and compared with light that is produced by another sample after a known exposure to radiation. This gives a count of the radiation received by the sample and after some math the time between the two heating events can be calculated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by Andre
But the real and new trick for pottery dating is http://www.dal.ca/~digs/tl1.htm It's a complicated trick. But basically is possible to measure the time between two consecutive heating events of some minerals.

Minerals like clay in pottery, have the property of thermoluminescence (TL). What happens is that part of the energy from radioactive decay in the mineral is stored (electrons). When the material is heated that they glow like pottery that is heated in the stove. The amount of glowing tells something of the amount of trapped elektrons. The energy is released again and the electrons recombine with ions. This resets the radioactive counting clock. And during radioactive exposure, the trapped electrons start to build again.

For the TL-dating, the pottery sample is reheated again. The emited light is analysed and compared with light that is produced by another sample after a known exposure to radiation. This gives a count of the radiation received by the sample and after some math the time between the two heating events can be calculated.

Thanks, Andre. I appreciate your time and knowledge. Beren - that article is facinating! Thank you, too. Thanks, EVERYONE!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TL dating is pretty good, but the downside is that the pottery is nearly always destroyed in the process. The re-heating makes it very brittle and it will usually fall apart/crumble the very next time it's handled.

Also, some comparative analysis needs to be done to the soil.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
8K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
13K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K