We were discussing the dating of the collapse of the Zarubintsy culture, which I would like to have happened in 72 BCE. the year Ariovisus said he and his army left home, never to return, and which Pachkova places i 40 - 70 CE.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/68351
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/68398?var=0&l=1
'In the Przeworsk culture Roman times begins with the appearance of fibulae Almgren 68 in 40-70 CE. [Liana 1970, pp. 429 - 491; DÄ
browska 1976, pp. 153-165]. It is true that in a later paper by T. DÄ
browska limits it to the end of the first or the beginning of the second decade of the 1st cent. CE [DÄ
browska 1988, s. 305].'
...
'K.V. Kasparova, orienting herself on the chronology of the late pre-Roman period of the Przeworsk culture, also identified 40-70 CE as the end of the Zarubintsy culture in Polesie [1981, p. 16]. This date, basically, the researchers of the Zarubintsy culture accepted for other regions, mentioning special, later time intervals for Late Zarubinetsy sites (end of 1st - 2nd cent. CE) Over time, T. DÄ
browska revised the end of the late pre-Roman period in the Przeworsk culture, lowering it to the end of the first or the beginning of the second decade CE [DÄ
browska 1988, p. 305].'
...
'It is true that in determining the range of late Zarubintsy sites and their chronological framework there are disagreements. In their composition are included sites, spread over a vast territory of the forest-steppe and southern part of the forest zone of the Right Bank and Left Bank Dnieper area, which do not form a monolithic territorial unity. Their occurrence is connected with the crisis of the Zarubintsy culture in 40-70 CE, and the time of their functioning determine the begin of the cultures of Late Roman time (Chernyakhov and Kiev) at the end of the 2nd - beginning of the 3rd cent. CE [Oblomsky, Terpilovsky, Petrauskas 1990].'
...
'Only in the cemetery Vishenki, a group of burials stands out by a quantity somewhat greater than on the cape cemeteries (16% versus 3% in Pirogov), the ceramic materials of which may belong to the concluding period of the Zarubintsy culture and date to the time after 40-70 CE (end of the 1st - beginning of the 2nd cent. CE).'
In other words, the dating of the transition from LaTène to Roman times at 40-70 CE is based on a single type of find, that of fibulae type Almgren 68.
Carl-Axel Moberg
Almgren 68, Om datering av en fibulaform från romersk järnålder
http://fornvannen.se/pdf/1940talet/1949_119.pdf
'Summary
Fibulae, type »Almgren 68» (i. e. like fig. 68 in O. Almgrens work, »Studien über nordeuropäische Fibelformen», 1897) are generally believed to belong to the first century A. D. Preidel has tried to provide a more exact dating of this type. There exist two important possibilities for establishing a chronology of these fibulae. Attention has been called to the considerable number of specimens from the Roman fortifications at Hofheim, said to have been established not earlier than 39 A. D. and finally abandoned not later than 83 A. D. However, this way of dating should be used cautiously, because the Hofheim fibulae are not quite similar to those from the lower Vistula region, where the type has been found more frequently by far. In the latter district, chronological evidence may be gained from a number of grave finds, where »Almgren 68» is accompanied by other datable objects. It seems to have been found in graves, not only from the earlier part of the Early Roman Period of Northern Europe, but also from a later date. According to the conventionally used, but very uncertain chronology, the time of »Almgren 68» would be 0â"200 A. D. Finds containing no other datable objects than this fibula, should not be given a more precise dating. This shows the special difficulties in connection with dating of finds, containing only one object of chronological value. Groups of few and poor finds should be dated within wider limits, even if they contain isolated objects that seem to permit a more exact chronology.'
So the 40-70 CE comes from the time interval the Roman Hofheim camp was functioning.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kastell_Hofheim
'Name und Herkunft der hier stationierten Besatzung dieser Periode sind mangels diesbezüglicher Funde unbekannt geblieben. Sicher ist nur, dass mit einer Besatzung in Kohortenstärke (500 Mann) zu rechnen ist. Anhand einiger Funde wird vermutet, dass die Einheit möglicherweise aus dem Donauraum stammte und wahrscheinlich illyrischer Herkunft war. Zusätzlich zu dieser Auxilliartruppe waren im Kastell auch einige Reiter stationiert.'
"The name and provenance of the contingent based here in this period remain unknown for lack of relevant finds. The only certain fact is that a strength of a cohort (500 men) should be taken account of. Given certain finds it is assumed that the unit might have been from the Danube area and probably was of Illyrian provenance. In addition to this auxilliary troop some cavaly was also based here."
...
'Die Errichtung des älteren Erdkastells erfolgte in den Jahren 39/40 n. Chr. während des Feldzugs Caligulas in Germanien. Wurde ursprünglich davon ausgegangen, dass das Kastell beim Einfall der Chatten 50/51 n. Chr. niedergebrannt wurde, deuten die jüngeren Untersuchungen an, dass sich diese Brandkatastrophe erst 69 n. Chr. ereignete. Die Fundsituation deutet auf kriegerische Auseinandersetzungen hin, welche vielleicht im Zusammenhang mit den Thronwirren nach Neros Tod stehen. Nach seiner Zerstörung wurde es wieder aufgebaut, wahrscheinlich aber nur noch für die Zeit der Errichtung des Steinkastells genutzt.
Von 72 n. Chr. an erfolgte die Erbauung des Steinkastells in drei Bauphasen.'
"The construction of the older earthen fort took place in the years 39/40 CE during Caligula's campaign in Germania. Whereas it was originally assumed that the fort was burned down in the incursion of the Chatti in 50/51 CE more recent investigations suggest that this conflagration belongs to the years after 69 CE. The find situation points to armed conflicts, perhaps in connection with the succession wars after Nero's death. After its destruction it was rebuilt, probably only used for the duration of the construction of the stone fort.
From 72 CE the stone fort was built in three phases."
In other words, they weren't ethnic Romans (since they were an auxilliary troop)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auxiliaries_(Roman_military)
That means that the whole construction that Almgren 68, and with it the transition in Northern Europe from Late LaTène to Early Roman time, belongs to 40-70 CE rests on the assumption that the Illyrian (?, but in any case non-Roman) troop did not have Almgren 68 fibulae before they entered Roman service in Hofheim. Given that that type of fibula occurs in non-Roman territory, that is a bold assumption, to say the least. If, as Moberg assumes, that fibula type had an active span of 200 years (0 - 200 CE), why not 300 (100 BCE - 200 CE), since it occurs with Late LaTène at the lower Vistula area? In that case, the troop in Hofheim would be descendants of Ariovistus' Sueui, and perhaps we should call Almgren 68 Sueuian instead of Roman; the Almgren 68 finds in the lower Vistula region would then have belonged to the stay-at-homes.
Torsten