Another Viking Artifact!

Patrick · Post by **Patrick** » Sun Jan 25, 2004 4:07 am

Just got this e-mail. Since folks here had such fun with the last one, thought y'all would like to do it again!

____________
Dear Viking friend,
Some time go I sent you an email about a strange artefact that we have found at
our excavation of the Viking Age harbour on the island of Gotland. I couldn't
imagen that I would get so many answers. I find it fascinating with all the
respons from you. There were many brilliant answers and I think it could be
interesting for you all to see the answers. So, I have put together a pdf file
for you to read. It became a document of 32 pages!

Now I have a new object for you to help me to understand. It is a piece of blue
glass that has been attached to something. To look at the object, please go to
www.arkeodok.com, and click on the link Strange artefact. That link will also
take you to the pdf file about the little bone that we discussed a couple of
months ago.

I would also like to take the opportunity to tell you that the summer course of
Viking Archaeology at Gotland University now is open for applicants. Please have
a look at: www.hgo.se, and go for the English pages and click the link Courses
in English.

I am very much looking forward to your ideas about the little glass object.

Best regards
Dan Carlsson
Gotland University
__________________

-Patrick

Vladimir · Post by **Vladimir** » Sun Jan 25, 2004 7:40 am

cannot find server on either link

olafr · Post by **olafr** » Sun Jan 25, 2004 11:27 am

Wrong adresses here is the right ones.

http://www.arkeodok.com/

http://www2.hgo.se/main.nsf/index

Brennus · Post by **Brennus** » Sun Jan 25, 2004 11:44 am

The bone object is most likely an unfinished bone comb.

http://www.wkac.ac.uk/archaeology/oramsarbour/images/0607_2big.jpg

To make a bone comb different sized holes were drilled then teeth were cut out by using a string as a saw.

HugoFuchs · Post by **HugoFuchs** » Sun Jan 25, 2004 6:10 pm

That little object is a gem. Technically a fake but you see lots of them in the early middle ages, You find them on book covers, crowns, an assortment of jewelry. Seems that even then they had the 10' rule. [img]http://forums.armourarchive.org/ubb/wink.gif[/img] Glass, both in stone size and in enameling, was used for decoration. They might want to put it under a microscope and see if there are traces of gilding. Although it may have been removed during the cleaning process. Truth is carbochans are, often today, still attached with a similar method. Glass gems were as common then as synthetic gemstones and zirconias are today. If you want some pics that have similar things, I could probably look up and post some. As for whether people would steal them, like many high-end holy books, the front of the Book of Kells was jewel encrusted (probably with a number of glass ones) and was stolen. You'll also find many with gemstones as well.

The previous item could also be the tooth side of a cetacean jawbone minus its teeth of course.

Ny Bjorn · Post by **Ny Bjorn** » Mon Jan 26, 2004 1:21 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Brennus:
The bone object is most likely an unfinished bone comb.

http://www.wkac.ac.uk/archaeology/oramsarbour/images/0607_2big.jpg

To make a bone comb different sized holes were drilled then teeth were cut out by using a string as a saw. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

-Ehr, just a minor detail: All of the Norse Gotlandic combs I've seen have had tooths of the same size and width and they were all cut with hacksaws or similar tools (there are combs from all stages in the line of production found on the island and elsewhere). The latter can be clearly seen since the saws quite often left marks on the comb's back plates.

For an introduction to comb making look here and for drawings of combs (Gotlandic) look here. For close-up photos look [url=http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/ixbin/hixclient.exe?_IXDB_=compass&_IXSR_=ng8&_IXSS_=_IXMAXHITS_%3d1%26_IXFIRST_%3d1%26_IXtour%3dENC9344%26_IXDB_%3dcompass%26%2524% 2bwith%2ball_unique_id_index%2bis%2b%2524%3dOBJ5801&_IXFIRST_=1&_IXMAXHITS_=1&_IXSPFX_=graphical/full/lg&_IXimg=ps342627.jpg&_IXtour=ENC9344&submit-button=summary]here[/url] and here

/N B

[This message has been edited by Ny BjÃ¶rn (edited 01-26-2004).]

Brennus · Post by **Brennus** » Mon Jan 26, 2004 6:12 am

While I don't know viking bone combs specifically I do know bone combs. If we look at the detail from these combs on the sites you give. http://frojel.hgo.se/Object%20Gallery/Kammar/Enkelkammar/image/kam-99.jpg
and http://frojel.hgo.se/Object%20Gallery/Kammar/Enkelkammar/image/kam.-f3728.jpg

You will see several items that line up neatly with the bone object in the strange artifact link. First the object has a series of holes along the top which in the combs are used to attach a strengthening bar. Also if you look at the side vew on the second link you will see the combs are beveled. The strange artifact has the same bevel. Regardless I don't tend to agree with the conclusions drawn in the pdf file.

Ny Bjorn · Post by **Ny Bjorn** » Mon Jan 26, 2004 12:53 pm

The photos of the plate at Arkeodokâ€™s site suffer from distorted perspective - the plate is nicely bent since it is simply cut from a larger bone, i.e. it follows the bones natural curvature. Secondly the holes are of different diameters (4 different bits) and too close to the edge even for a tooth plate.

The site at FrÃ¶jel is a bit too early for bone combs (at least the context where the plate was found) - antler was the main source for combs in Viking Age Scandinavia.

Cheers

/N B

Brennus · Post by **Brennus** » Mon Jan 26, 2004 9:11 pm

The only problem is nobody else has come up with anything close to what it should be. It is possible that the piece is actually the strengthening cross bar on top of the comb itself. The different sized holes don't bother me as the differences are barely detectable with the eye and anyone that has made holes in bone or wood knows it is hard to make them exactly the same. If the bone is not beveled then I may be wrong but my first impression was comb.