En nordjysk grav fra romersk jernalder. Sen romersk jernalders kronologi i Nordvesteuropa

Jensen, Stig Jorgo; Bluestone, Barbara

doi:10.7146/kuml.v28i28.106963

“…In period I.1b, belt hooks with protruding clasps are introduced, initially with a tongue-shaped outline, followed by a triangular outline, before becoming narrow in outline by period II.1. Also occurring in period II.1 are iron rings with shank [10].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

“…A list of type names in English and Danish is provided in S1.1.1 Table in S1 File. According to the typochronology of Jensen [10], the earliest pin type has a coiled head and a bend in the upper part of the pin, just beneath the head. In period I.1b-I.2a, the bend moves down the needle, creating a neck beneath the head.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

“…One exception from Jensen's typology [10] is made regarding the subdivision of pins with circular head based on the size of the head. Pins with 'large' heads (diameter >2x pin width) are supposedly introduced a little earlier than pins with 'small' head (diameter <2x pin width).…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ornamentation is rare and although vessel rim shapes are chronologically sensitive [7] they have often been destroyed by agricultural activity, making them ill-suited for chronological studies. Instead, typological division is based on vessel proportions (height and width) [10]. Individual types are designated by a number referring to the shape of the vessel body, and a capital letter referring to the shape of the vessel neck (S1.1.1-S1.1.3 Tables in S1 File.).…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Metalwork typology has been assumed to be chronologically sensitive, with more rapidly changing typological traits, whereas pottery types are considered to be more 'conservative' and longer-lasting [9]. Jensen [10] revised the chronological framework, specifically avoiding the use of 'type fossils' and divided the PRIA into two main chronological periods: Early PRIA (c.500-250 BC) and Late PRIA (c.250 BC-AD 1) [11], with further divisions into sub-periods and phases specific to the geographical area.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Dividing time—An absolute chronological study of material culture from Early Iron Age urnfields in Denmark

Rose,

Meadows

2024

PLoS ONE

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronological frameworks based on artefact typologies are essential for interpreting the archaeological record, but they inadvertently treat transitions between phases as abrupt events and disregard the temporality of transformation processes within and between individual phases. This study presents an absolute chronological investigation of a dynamic material culture from Early Iron Age urnfields in Denmark. The chronological framework of Early Iron Age in Southern Scandinavia is largely unconstrained by absolute dating, primarily due to it coinciding with the so-called ‘Hallstatt calibration plateau’ (c.750 to 400 cal BC), and it is difficult to correlate it with Central European chronologies due to a lack of imported artefacts. This study applies recent methodological advances in radiocarbon dating and Bayesian chronological modelling, specifically a statistical model for wood-age offsets in cremated bone and presents the first large-scale radiocarbon investigation of regional material culture from Early Iron Age in Southern Jutland, Denmark. Dated material is primarily cremated bone from 111 cremation burials from three urnfields. The study presents absolute date ranges for 16 types of pottery and 15 types of metalwork, which include most of the recognised metalwork types from the period. This provides new insights into gradual change in material culture, when certain artefact types were in production and primary use, how quickly types were taken up and later abandoned, and distinguishing periods of faster and slower change. The study also provides the first absolute chronology for the period, enabling correlation with chronologies from other regions. Urnfields were introduced at the Bronze-Iron Age transformation, which is often assumed to have occurred c.530-500 BC. We demonstrate that this transformation took place in the 7th century BC, however, which revives the discussion of whether the final Bronze Age period VI should be interpreted as a transitional phase to the Iron Age.

show abstract

Dividing Time – An Absolute Chronological Study of Material Culture from Early Iron Age Urnfields in Denmark

Rose,

Meadows

2023

Preprint

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronological frameworks based on artefact typologies are essential for interpreting the archaeological record, but they inadvertently treat transitions between phases as abrupt events and disregard the temporality of transformation processes within and between individual phases. This study presents an absolute chronological investigation of a dynamic material culture from Early Iron Age urnfields in Denmark. The chronological framework of Early Iron Age in Southern Scandinavia is largely unconstrained by absolute dating, primarily due to it coinciding with the so-called ‘Hallstatt calibration plateau’ (c.750 to 400 cal BC), and it is difficult to correlate it with Central European chronologies due to a lack of imported artefacts. This study applies recent methodological advances in radiocarbon dating and Bayesian chronological modelling, specifically a statistical model for wood-age offsets in cremated bone and presents the first large-scale radiocarbon investigation of regional material culture from Early Iron Age in Southern Jutland, Denmark. Dated material is primarily cremated bone from 111 cremation burials from three urnfields. The study presents absolute date ranges for 16 types of pottery and 15 types of metalwork, which include most of the recognised metalwork types from the period. This provides new insights into gradual change in material culture, when certain artefact types were in production and primary use, how quickly types were taken up and later abandoned, and distinguishing periods of faster and slower change. The study also provides the first absolute chronology for the period, enabling correlation with chronologies from other regions. Urnfields were introduced at the Bronze-Iron Age transformation, which is often assumed to have occurred c.530-500 BC. We demonstrate that this transformation took place in the 7th century BC, however, which revives the discussion of whether the final Bronze Age period VI should be interpreted as a transitional phase to the Iron Age.

show abstract

Fornvännen 2 2024

2024

Fornvännen

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

En nordjysk grav fra romersk jernalder. Sen romersk jernalders kronologi i Nordvesteuropa

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Dividing time—An absolute chronological study of material culture from Early Iron Age urnfields in Denmark

Dividing time—An absolute chronological study of material culture from Early Iron Age urnfields in Denmark

Dividing Time – An Absolute Chronological Study of Material Culture from Early Iron Age Urnfields in Denmark

Fornvännen 2 2024

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About