| Original Message: Re: archaeological digs |
|---|
|
I think the first thing that anyone who has taken part in archaeological digs in Southeast Asia or anywhere else knows is that there are no simple rules for what a particular set of artefacts is going to look like. There's a huge range of variants, even within identical contexts. This applies to ceramics and bronze, to beads and later on to sculptural stone. I could give you many specific examples; here's one: a couple of weeks or so ago, when we were talking about hardstone rings and bracelets here, I showed a bangle from Ban Chiang that had been repaired with gold. I'll post it here again. It was found in the same grave within thirty centimetres of the object in the second photo, a jade bead also repaired with gold. I was present when they were both excavated. Neither has been cleaned beyond a very gentle wash to remove some surface dirt. You'll see how different the colour and patina of the gold is. Here the difference in part is easily explicable - bronze rivets in the bracelet; beautiful gold ones in the bead - but most of the time such differences appear to have no explanation. And this happens all the time. I'd actually be worried if any group of artefacts didn't exhibit a wide range of variations. Cheers, Will All rights reserved by Bead Collector Network and its users |
|
|