01-29-2009, 07:26 AM
Hi Christian,
Sure, sure, everything is possible and no-one should entrench himself before much more facts are known.
2. true enough, but then many objects could indeed be Roman, so we can go either way. You’re correct that there are no typology models for throwing weapons, but to draw the conclusion that such remains could be Germanic would be equally unfounded. To me the ballista bolts are the most telling. I’m not prepared to hypothesise that the German tribes could have been using such machines, when other evidence for that is completely lacking.
I'm not happy with the Streufunde explanation. These are tell-tale objects and to explain them as stray finds (Streufunde) is I think not correct. I'm not comparing anyone in particular to Dan Peterson, but do you recall how he tried to explain away Kalkriese as a 'mule station with a Roman wall around it plus at best a shoebox worth of Roman finds'? :oops:
Sure, sure, everything is possible and no-one should entrench himself before much more facts are known.
Quote:1. I think methodologically one easily falls for the "Methode Kosinna" in this case.1. Kosinna? Don't know him. I usually go by the method of 'when is swims like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, the first thing I think about is a duck', and not and assorted collection of feathers imported by a small goose with an accent. :mrgreen:
2. From all the items I have seen from this excavation less than ten can be certainly of Roman origin. That is the tent peg (?), the pilum shank, the cart piece, the coin, the Hippo-sandal, the fragmentary Thekenbeschlag, the axe, and the coin. As has been pointed out by Simplex, the objects may be Streufunde as well. I think there is so far by far not enough information to actually draw certain conclusions about whether Romans were involved or not. AFAIK there is no certain / working typology for spearheads, arrowheads and javelinheads etc. which could actually tell us which objects are clearly Roman or Germanic. Even metallurgical analysis is difficult in this case, for knowing where the iron comes from does not tell us who used it.
2. true enough, but then many objects could indeed be Roman, so we can go either way. You’re correct that there are no typology models for throwing weapons, but to draw the conclusion that such remains could be Germanic would be equally unfounded. To me the ballista bolts are the most telling. I’m not prepared to hypothesise that the German tribes could have been using such machines, when other evidence for that is completely lacking.
I'm not happy with the Streufunde explanation. These are tell-tale objects and to explain them as stray finds (Streufunde) is I think not correct. I'm not comparing anyone in particular to Dan Peterson, but do you recall how he tried to explain away Kalkriese as a 'mule station with a Roman wall around it plus at best a shoebox worth of Roman finds'? :oops:
Robert Vermaat
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
MODERATOR
FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)