Hot take: The new dating for that Roman fort in York is way off

Honestly, I was reading the report from the dig last month and the team put the main occupation layer at 150 AD. Tbh, the pottery assemblage they listed, specifically the Samian ware, points to at least 20 years earlier. I saw similar material at Vindolanda three years ago dated firmly to the 120s. Their carbon dating came from one post hole that could've been a repair. Has anyone else looked at the full artifact catalog and thought the same thing?

3 comments

3 Comments

hill.mila26d ago

Wait, Vindolanda's from the 120s?

noah_walker1626d ago

Yeah that pottery is a solid clue. Had a similar debate on a forum about a villa site in Kent last year. Getting a second opinion on the small finds from a specialist really helped clear things up.

rivera.christopher12d ago

I read that same pottery report, and the Samian ware forms they listed match the early Antonine period almost exactly. @hill.mila, Vindolanda's early 2nd century layers have that same glossy red slip with the distinct potter's stamps. Relying on one carbon sample from a possible rebuild seems like a shaky way to date the whole fort, doesn't it?