Moorhouse, S. A. (1986). Non-Dating Uses of Medieval Pottery. Medieval Ceramics Volume 10: Bulletin of the Medieval Pottery Research Group. Vol 10, London: Medieval Pottery Research Group. pp. 124-130. https://doi.org/10.5284/1105912. Cite this via datacite
Title The title of the publication or report |
Non-Dating Uses of Medieval Pottery | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Issue The name of the volume or issue |
Medieval Ceramics Volume 10: Bulletin of the Medieval Pottery Research Group | |||
Series The series the publication or report is included in |
Medieval Ceramics: Journal of the Medieval Ceramics Research Group | |||
Volume Volume number and part |
10 | |||
Page Start/End The start and end page numbers. |
124 - 130 | |||
Downloads Any files associated with the publication or report that can be downloaded from the ADS |
|
|||
Licence Type ADS, CC-BY 4.0 or CC-BY 4.0 NC. |
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International Licence |
|||
DOI The DOI (digital object identifier) for the publication or report. |
|
|||
Publication Type The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book |
Journal | |||
Abstract The abstract describing the content of the publication or report |
This paper examines some of the many non-dating uses of medieval pottery on site. It is argued that the traditional role of medieval pottery as a dating media is its least reliable quality. The different aspects of pottery distribution on site are considered, including the dispersal of sherds from the same vessel, distribution of forms, evidence for use (including wear marks, sooting, residues and secondary holes), patterns of dumping, residual material, pots found in situ and the relevance of excavated groups of artefacts. Much of the discussion is based on the material from the extensively excavated Sandal Castle (West Yorkshire). Evidence is also produced to show that similar results can be obtained from sites where excavation has been much more limited. The conclusions reached have far reaching implications for the way in which sites are excavated and, more significantly, for the way in which the finds from them are interpreted. Perhaps most importantly, a number of techniques allow the residual element to be identified, which on many types of site is very high, suggesting that not only should we be much more critical about the validity of groups as excavated, but also about the way in which we publish the material. | |||
Year of Publication The year the book, article or report was published |
1986 | |||
Locations Any locations covered by the publication or report. This is not the place the book or report was published. |
|
|||
Source Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in. |
ADS Archive
(ADS Archive)
|
|||
Relations Other resources which are relevant to this publication or report |
|
|||
Created Date The date the record of the pubication was first entered |
18 Apr 2023 |