Skeleton under ship is Iron age [ Newport Ship ]

BBC ^ | Monday, 5 December 2005 | unattributed

[SunkenCiv]

The remains of a skeleton found underneath a medieval ship discovered buried in the banks of the River Usk in Newport are that of an Iron age man. Tests carried out on the bones which were found in December 2002, have shown that they date back to 170BC... about 1,500 years older than the 15th century ship. The man is thought to have been about 5ft 9in tall and very muscular. He was probably in his late 20s or early 30s when he died. Experts carried out radio carbon dating on the bones which were found underneath wooden struts supporting the ship as workers carried out an excavation of the orchestra pit of the city's Riverfront Theatre and Arts Centre on 11 December 2002... At the time of the find, it was thought that the man may have died in an industrial accident as he was salvaging the boat... When the ship was first found, thousands of people flocked to Newport to see it as it lay in the banks of the River Usk. There were fears that the ship would be broken up and not preserved but a £3.5m grant was given by the Welsh Assembly Government to fund the restoration.

[SunkenCiv]

---

---

[SunkenCiv]

Lucky Coin Found In Medieval Ship
BBC | 2-7-2006
Posted on 02/07/2006 1:57:53 PM EST by blam
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1573675/posts

[SunkenCiv]

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list. Thanks.

Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)

[atomicpossum]

This guy's lawyer will file a claim against the shipping company, watch.

[SunkenCiv]

No, but the UK's version of NAGPRA will result in the modern self-styled members of a PreRoman tribe (or the Druids) to come forward and demand that the remains be reburied in secret.

[colorcountry]

Tests carried out on the bones which were found in December 2002, have shown that they date back to 170BC... about 1,500 years older than the 15th century ship.

...or perhaps their testing is faulty?

[ClearCase_guy]

That was my first thought.

[NYer]

The man is thought to have been about 5ft 9in tall and very muscular.

It always amazes me how they can determine that by looking at bones.

[Integrityrocks]

very muscular.....

My thought too. How does one determine muscular from bones. Oh well. Still pretty cool find.

[Kolb]

Muscularity can be determined by the size & depth of tendon insertion points on the bones. Large and deep insertion sites indicate larger muscles.

[ZULU]

Doesn't bone cross-sectional size also indicate strength?

[Max in Utah]

Mostly bone density, I think. Early astronauts were found to have lost bone density after prolonged periods in zero-gravity, where stresses on the skeleton were greatly reduced.

[SunkenCiv]

I've wondered about the effects of long-term submergence on RC testing, but perhaps the potential effect is slight, and some kind of baseline can be used to make a decent correction. I doubt that the impact of submergence is 1500 years though.

[colorcountry]

I doubt that the impact of submergence is 1500 years though.

I wonder what the chances are that this Iron age ship just "happened" to settle upon a skeleton that was 1500 years already dead?

I'll take my chances that the test is faulty. I assume they did RC dating, do we know the effects of water, trapped air, tree resins, and other unknown factors, etc. on the deterioration of carbon?

[SunkenCiv]

There's no effect on the deterioration of carbon -- the risk is that there's a later contamination by C12, which would skew the results toward older. As far as the odds -- well, a medieval Byzantine wreck was found in (if memory serves) the Aegean, and right under it was a wreck at least 1000 years older.

I'd buy into your doubt if there were, say, a dozen or more human remains, suggesting a whole bunch of crewmen of this old ship got trapped and sucked under, then buried. There's just nothing like that here. The reason the remains were found is that the boat had already been found. No one was looking on the bottom to see if they could find Iron Age man.

[colorcountry]

Thanks, you're the expert.

And thanks for the thread - it is fascinating (as are all the threads you post here).

[SunkenCiv]

Heh... if I'm the expert, we're all in really, really big trouble.

;')

Thanks for your comments above, and for the kind remarks. :')

[lepton]

I assume they did RC dating, do we know the effects of water, trapped air, tree resins, and other unknown factors, etc. on the deterioration of carbon?

They might seep into it...and make it seem newer than it is...but it wouldn't make it test older.

[Caramelgal]

Thanks for the clarification. I agree. This planet has been inhabited for a long time.

My house is only five years old and sits on land that was farmland for a long, long time and I bet if I excavated my court, I could find some evidence of that. And before it was farmland Indian tribes, probably the Susquehannocks, inhabited this area.

If some time in the future, some archeologist excavates the buried remains of my little townhouse and below finds the bones of a Susquehannock, it doesn’t mean he lived in my house, it means my house was built on top of his remains. If so - sorry old Indian dude, I didn't know so don't do the Poltergeist thing on me - :)

[U S Army EOD]

They said "was" very muscular, not "is" very muscular.