during an excavation of a late 11th early 12th century large house we found these objects from a sword
can these be middel- 12th century.
we found a small coinhoard of about 150 coins from 1035-1075 to.
but my understanding pommel and crossbar is late 13th century ? hole for blade 60 mm wide
please help us understand our finds.
thank you
Finn

---

 Attachment: 68.32 KB



 Attachment: 112.35 KB
[ Download ]

The pommel looks like this one:
http://www.myArmoury.com/view.html?features/pic_geibig22.jpg

Which dates to late 12th and throughout 13th century (Typology of A.Geibig).

Best regards,
Viktor

Thanks for posting, a very nice find. Assume the blade was in very bad condition?

The pommel is a Geibig type 13 (variant ii)/Oakeshott type D. Used throughout the 13th century. Do they appear in the late 12th? Not sure.

There's a thread about them here:-
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t...mp;start=0

I had already read the typology of these pommels, that is why i postet it here, because all other finds are 100%
certain no later than 1150.
so that must mean theese items here where dug down at a later point.
there was no blade, but a blacksmiths place was allso excavatet, also datet to 1000-1100 because of spur and 5 small
knives and tools, it is believed to be one of the residens of a bishop, or possible the king due to the name of the place.
no other weaponry was found, witch is a bit od.
thank you for your comments.
one of the knives and 3 of the coins from hoard.

---

 Attachment: 225.6 KB
[ Download ]

Conventional wisdom would place the pommel and crossbar as later than the coins anyway.
But what is the context of the building complex? Do you have any theories or supporting findings on how or why the site was abandoned?

we dont really know, no sign of burnt buildings, it appears that allmost everything was left.
there is a possebility that it just moved closer to the church, and left not needed things behind, but excavation here will not be before late this year because of farming.
a coinhoard however could suggest sudden trouble, and death of owner, the hoard was found inside the house, so it would have been possible to remember where it was buried.

It might be more logical to accept that such pommels were in use slightly earlier than we thought than trying to think of some unusual scenario about how this pommel ended there. :D If all other items really are from before 1150. :)

The Mary Rose basket hilts significantly pushed back the dating of that type, so I'm with those who say the type dating needs to be reconsidered in light of recent archaeology. As much as we all revere Oakeshott, I think he would be the first to say that we shouldn't accept that work as the last word.

I gather that the soil coloration/condition of the pit in question was too ambiguous to settle the question of later intrusion, but as long as that's an open question I think the start date for this type should be held open.

All wood is dendro or c14 datet to 1025-1135 give or take 25 years, latest jewelry is calld Urnes-style and not seen after 1170 and not before 1040
earliste jevelry ringerike- style from 1000-1150
a special danish bird-brooch from 1100 + -
earliste coin 935 latest 1074.
we know from history that only 400 meters from the house there was a 14-15th century execution place.
all knives ar anglo-saxon-norman style, tools are a little harder to date.
a previous excavation found late viking graves in the church, witch suggest a previous wooden church.

but as i stated before it might have been buried at a later date. and 13th century living on af neighboring field
since it is a rather large and ritch settlement with a church built in 1125, it is difficult to understand the lack of weapons, not one arrowhead .
My post was only to hear if anyone have knowledge of til pommel and crossguard on 12th century sword,
i found this on hermann historica stating stating 1100 but that might be wrong ?
"my" pommel has been grinded on top to release the blade.
the soil layer in witch the items were found could be contaminatet, it is not a 100 % certain, I would have liked to call in
geologists to take soil sampels, but there was no money for that.
the national museum was really only interestet in securing the coins.

---

 Attachment: 93.99 KB

You are all right, that is why it will be rather interesting to have this dig continued to see if the conventional dating can be challenged based on modern analytical methods :)

It is great when finds come with context, as opposed to antiques on the open (sometimes shady) market, or museum pieces with long lost provenances

at first I was certain that the sword items were period, it would fit, perhaps a captured sword with an odd pommel, then the blacksmith replaces it with a more scandinavian style.
then i start reading the posts here and then comes the doubt, if you know what I mean.
ewerything fits the dating but this piece .
I hope we will find a grave with a sword and wooden scabbard, that would really nail it :D
thank you all for participating . :)

I do not mean anything in my reply to sound critical, but some of the discussion here has mildly perturbed me.

I do archaeology at Oxford, and did archeology at Brown University before that. The idea that someone from a funded dig is turning to the internet for analysis of a find, is just mildly disturbing.
The person on the other end offering advice, might be a 14 year old with a knowledge of this period based on films... or the chair of a department at an accredited university.

This type of discussion is usually the sort of thing that gets analysed in post-excavation research, and published in an academic journal.

Archaeology is finicky, finding an exact date for items is very hard. Offering any sort of advice, or insight, without much more context and information about the site would be silly beyond measure.

Keep in mind two bits of information --an auction catalogue is hardly admissible as evidence for a piece's date.

Secondarily, something I was taught as a first year undergraduate, the items (coins, jewellery, etc.) only give a terminus post quem. They do not securely date the find.

But this type of thing is unlikely to ever be settled, and, usually, the subject of a much longer article discussing the abnormality of a find.

Best,

Hadrian

guess we know who the mind of the 14 yo is now.
keeping everything bottled up in the academic world for 50 years sure as he.. isn't going help anyone.
see absolutly no reason not to hear other oppinions.
You gave me yours, :\

If anyone misinterpreted my remark, I apologise. I was not insinuating anyone here was ignorant --or 14. I do not know any of you. I was simply trying to emphasise the point that we do not know who is answering this type of question.

In regard to Patrick Kelly, while I agree there are plenty of 'blindly ignorant' people in archaeology, and academia.. this is very dependent on the type of institution, and the subject matter being discussed. There are blindly ignorant people everywhere, and -usually- these people are not found in academic circles. I have met far more people who are ignorant outside of archeology than I have within it. It's just museum workers, and archaeologists, are usually quite specialised.. with a very narrow depth of knowledge.

Straight cross Gaddhjalts have been dated to everything from 10th to 14th Century, perhaps even later depending on how far in the evolution of swords you perceive ceratin aspects of it still lingering in the designs.

The Tea kettle variant not being my forte I'd have to go with Hermann Historica above (always a pretty safe bet) on this one and guess around 1100 AD?